⁴⁴⁵³¹

Thursday, 22 September 2005

[Open session]

[The witness entered court]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

JUDGE KWON: Judge Robinson cannot be with us today due to an urgent matter, so Judge Bonomy and myself will be sitting today pursuant to 15 bis.

There's one matter of housekeeping before we go on, which arises out of yesterday's hearing in relation to the exhibits. Judge Robinson noted that a bunch of Prosecution exhibits which had been used during the cross-examination of Mr. Delic would be admitted, but there was some confusion and some certain modification is necessary. So we'll deal with it at the end of Mr. Delic's evidence, together with some remaining Defence items.

MR. NICE: I'm grateful.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, continue your examination, please.

WITNESS: BOGOLJUB JANICEVIC [Resumed]

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

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Janicevic, do you have any direct knowledge about what you only mentioned yesterday in response to the previous question about mass demonstrations of Albanian separatists in Kosovo in 1981?

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please start answering again. ⁴⁴⁵³² His microphone was not on.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, could you repeat your answer again. Could you start again.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said yes, of course. I personally took part in breaking up the hostile demonstrations in 1981. Those demonstrations started on the 11th of March. Their motto was to resolve the social welfare problems of the students, and they went on all the way up to the 5th of April.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In what capacity did you take part in this?

A. I was a policeman of the provincial SUP at the time.

Q. What was the nature of these demonstrations, and what were the messages of the demonstrators? You mentioned a few moments ago that purportedly that was due to the dissatisfaction of the students due to some problems that they were having.

A. The nature of these demonstrations was extremely nationalist and separatist. They were cheering for Albania and Enver Hoxha. Their slogans were: We are Albanians and not Yugoslavs. Furthermore, their slogans included the following: We are the children of Skenderbeg and the army of Enver Hoxha. From the 3rd to the 4th of April, these demonstrations turned into an armed rebellion, because in addition to the methods they used so far that could jeopardise people's health, they resorted to firearms as well.

JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Milosevic. Can I ask, Mr. Janicevic, whether you are reading from something. ⁴⁴⁵³³

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. These are just my preparations from the hotel. I'm just -- I'm not reading this, I'm just sort of glancing at it. Would you like to see this?

JUDGE KWON: Do you need that in answering the questions?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I need it by way of a reminder, to jog my memory.

JUDGE KWON: So you prepared it at your hotel room yesterday?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's been a long time. Yes, last night in my hotel room. If you like to, you can check this.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, please go on. You could have clarified that kind of thing in advance.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I talked to the witness rather briefly about all the subjects that I wish to ask him about. I assume that, bearing in mind these subjects, the witness sort of jotted down what I wanted to ask him. If it bothers you if he looks into his notes, the ones that he wrote in his hotel room, as he said, he doesn't have to do that.

JUDGE KWON: Let's go on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. A few moments ago you said that the demonstrators, since these demonstrations were violent, as you said, even resorted to firearms. Were there any casualties in these demonstrations?

A. Yes.

Q. So to the best of your recollection and to the best of your ⁴⁴⁵³⁴ knowledge, what was the outcome?

A. There were nine victims. Eight demonstrators and one policeman were killed. Ibrahim Abazi, an ethnic Albanian, was the policeman who got killed. He worked for the provincial SUP. Further on, there were 205 wounded persons, out of which 130 were policemen. The rest were participants in the demonstrations.

Q. Well, it seems that there were twice as many injured policemen when compared to the demonstrators.

A. Precisely.

Q. Tell me now: In view of your professional work, what was the security situation in Kosovo and Metohija after these demonstrations, from 1981 onwards, throughout that decade, from 1981 until 1990?

A. From 1981 until 1989, the political and security situation in Kosovo and Metohija was very complex and difficult. It was complex and difficult because pressures exerted by Albanian separatists and nationalists against Serbs and all other non-Albanians were on the rise and were even more pronounced than before.

May I just mention that in this period, from 1981 until 1988, 28.000 Serbs were practically expelled from Kosovo. Serbs only.

Q. Can you give some examples of the crimes that you referred to just now, those that happened after these demonstrations in 1981?

A. There are many examples, but I'm just going to mention two. The first example is the murder of Danilo Milincic, in the village of Samodreza, near Vucitrn, on the 2nd of June, 1981. And the second example is the murder of Miodrag Saric on the 3rd ⁴⁴⁵³⁵ of July, 1982, in the village of Mece near Djakovica. These are the most impressive examples.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Janicevic, can you tell me how you managed to remember these dates?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the book -- well, I was a policeman and I retired as a policeman only six or seven months ago, or rather, eight months ago, on the 31st of December, 2004. Every day we received bulletins and reports about what was going on in the territory of the province. These are the most impressive examples, and any citizen could remember these.

JUDGE BONOMY: So you have a personal recollection of these dates, have you? You didn't need to check anything, you have a personal recollection of them?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I checked these dates, but I know that it was in 1982.

JUDGE BONOMY: Why didn't you tell me you had checked them?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I've already said: I did not recall the exact date, but I knew the year. Is it that important that I've checked the date?

JUDGE BONOMY: I'm sorry, you didn't say you didn't remember the exact date; you said the exact opposite of that. But let's move on.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, do we need to dwell on these events in 1980s? Please move on. Bear that in mind, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very briefly. But, as you've heard, Mr. Janicevic was a policeman and a public official for a while. He was ⁴⁴⁵³⁶ president of a municipality. So his testimony can be quite authentic in terms of what happened and how the situation developed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, since you spent your entire career as a policeman in Kosovo and Metohija, do you have any other information about crimes, about the form they took, perhaps about some statistics of everything that happened to the detriment of Serbs, Montenegrins, and other non-Albanians in Kosovo?

A. I'll just give a few examples. For example, in the period from 1982 until 1984, ten rapes were committed, and there were 11 attempted rapes of Serb women by Albanian men. There were 286 crimes against Serbs and 1.249 misdemeanours where Serbs were the victims.

MR. NICE: I don't think we need ask the witness --

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: -- answer to the question whether he's done this from memory or from a record. He obviously has referred to a record, and to pick up the point that was concerning His Honour Judge Bonomy, if records are going to be relied upon or to have been relied upon, they should have been made available to us so that I can deal with their authenticity and accuracy. As it is, I shall be cross-examining somebody who has turned to records not available to me, or they may now be coming available. A briefcase is being opened.

JUDGE KWON: Setting aside the value, he can speak from his personal memory, can't he?

MR. NICE: He can of course speak from his memory if it's ⁴⁴⁵³⁷ relevant, but here we've seen a fairly -- a very precise listing of numbers, and it obviously comes from a record.

JUDGE KWON: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: What is the source of these statistics, Mr. Janicevic?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The source of these statistics that we've referred to is a publication called "Kosovo, the Past and Present." It was published in 1989 by Medjunarodna Politika, a publishing house in Belgrade.

JUDGE BONOMY: So can I take it that you've used the book, written notes out on a piece of paper, and now you're reading from a piece of paper to us?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not everything, just the figures. I cannot recall the exact figures after 20 years.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, by now you should know how to lead a witness. Let us move on.

JUDGE BONOMY: I personally would like to move to something relevant to this trial about which this witness has personal knowledge. Can we not get up to date?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, what you've just been saying, without entering into precise figures because you didn't count all this, but do you have any personal knowledge yourself dating back to those days about the things which you're testifying here; that is to say, the rapes, the killings, the destruction, the destruction done to cemeteries, and everything else that ⁴⁴⁵³⁸ you mentioned? Is that based on your own knowledge or did you learn it from books you've read?

A. Of course it's on the basis of my own personal knowledge. I have spent 33 years working in the Ministry of the Interior, mostly in the police force and involved in public security, law and order.

Q. All right, Mr. Janicevic. Now, for your testimony here, it's not vital that we quote precise figures. What is more important is to describe what went on, the kind of things that happened. So we don't need to hear exact numbers, figures. So you can limit yourself to your own personal knowledge and experience about the matters in hand here. In tab number 2, we have a brief contribution, a video, which testifies to what you said a moment ago. So may we show that footage?

[Videotape played]

MR. NICE: There should really be translation.

JUDGE KWON: Could we pause there a minute. Stop the video. Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: There should be a transcript or translation.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. It's not actually audible. Can you deal with it at this moment, with this? Do we need to view more?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What you were able to see on the video is the date. There was a "2" at the end. Was it '82, 1982? May we see the video again? And you can also see a Serbian Orthodox cemetery which has been destroyed.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, it is a very leading question. Ask ⁴⁴⁵³⁹ questions to the witness instead of you saying everything in advance. Mr. Milosevic, how long are you going to plan to have this witness? You said ten hours?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is a rough estimate.

JUDGE KWON: Only for your examination-in-chief?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Can we not move on to 1990s right now? And you can deal with the 1980s, if necessary, at the end of it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I think it is necessary, because this is a very important witness. However, if you insist that we move on ...

JUDGE BONOMY: What is the point you're trying to make about the 1980s?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The point that I'm trying to make is the continuation of violence against Serbs, Mr. Bonomy, which is ongoing today as well, with the help of those people of yours who issue orders, and your own state, Mr. Bonomy.

MR. NICE: Entirely domestic --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Those remarks -- my microphone is not working.

JUDGE BONOMY: I'm satisfied that there is no legitimate forensic purpose for this, in light of the remarks made to support the leading of this evidence, and I, for one, am certainly opposed to any further evidence about the 1980s. We've heard plenty of the historical background already, and we don't need it. ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁰

JUDGE KWON: Let us hear the evidence in relation to 1990s, in particular 1999, and let's deal with it later, 1980s. Please move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Fine. I shall go back to these questions, or perhaps I can just go through them now with respect to the exhibits that have been provided here for you, Mr. Kwon.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]. So let's move on and look at the most important points in the testimony of Mr. Janicevic, and then later on I'll go back and pick up the questions that I consider need to be asked in the examination-in-chief, and there are a series of exhibits here related to those matters. So just let me consult my notes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, in preparing for this testimony, we discussed the activities of the KLA and your knowledge thereof and the formation and establishment of that so-called Nerodimska zone, or area, and the KLA brigade which was within its composition.

Tell us when and where you arrived at information about the Nerodimlje zone and the brigade, the terrorist KLA brigade, which was within its composition.

A. Well, I'd first of all like to say when we first learnt about the formation of some terrorist group, or rather, one terrorist group in the SUP Urosevac area.

At the end of 1997, that was, when there was a terrorist attack against a police point in Grlica and the killing of a member, of an Albanian named Dugoli, on the 28th of November 1997. That was performed ^{44541 BLANK PAGE 44542} by a terrorist group which had been established by Shukri Buja and it was active in the area of Lipljani up to the gorge of Crnojevska. In January 1998, the first staff was established, the terrorist KLA staff, in the Urosevac area, in Jezerce to be exact. However, even before that, there were intimations, or rather, attempts to establish a paramilitary staff which at that time was not called the KLA staff. It was called the paramilitary staff for the defence of Nerodimlje, and this Nerodimlje zone and joining up all the terrorist organisations active in the Urosevac area took place somewhat later on, in the second half of 1998.

Q. Very well. Tell me, please, Mr. Janicevic: In tab 10, take a look at tab 10 in the documents you have there - and I think we all have those documents before us - whether they are indeed documents about the Nerodimlje operative zone. And tell us what those documents contain and whose documents they are, their origin and the time they date back to.

JUDGE KWON: Do we have a translation of this? I'm afraid not. There's no translation. If we could put the tab 10 on the ELMO so that we can follow.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I begin?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes. Go ahead. Put the documents in their order on the ELMO, please. They are mostly diagrams, schematics, and I think it will be easy to follow them. Just briefly, let's go through them.

JUDGE KWON: What is an RDB, first of all, Mr. Janicevic?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] RDB is the sector for state security ⁴⁴⁵⁴³ of the Republic of Serbia, which came under the Ministry of the Interior at that time.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. Go on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. This is a document of the state security; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And what date is it?

A. This document of the state security dates back to 1999.

Q. Could you explain to us, please, what this first diagram is all about, the one we can see there.

A. It is the operative zone of Nerodimlje, with the brigades and staffs. The commander of the so-called operative zone of Nerodimlje was Shukri Buja, and his nickname was Sokol, or falcon. He was called Gazetar previously but came to be known as Sokol. And the deputy commander was Ymer Gazi, and his nickname was Fehmi. Then we have Zoran Filmi [phoen]; Cari Lutara [phoen], called Kuri; Xhemajl Xhemajl [phoen], nicknamed Hadzija; Emir Acica [phoen], nicknamed Petrik; Sadiku Ismet, who was the first, in 1996, to set up a sort of paramilitary staff. Then there was Vica Saban [phoen], nicknamed Mudzahedin; Samir Hajrudin, nicknamed Selma, Jashari Milajm [phoen], nicknamed Professor; Fehmi Hajrunahu [phoen], nicknamed Fehma; and a man named Kospat or rather, his nickname was Spat, but we weren't sure of his real name.

Now, within the composition of the Nerodimlje Operative Zone, we have the brigade names: The 161st, Ahmed Medziku [phoen] was named later on, after January 1999. And the commander of this brigade was Ramusilje ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁴ Imi [phoen], nicknamed Granite.

Then we have the 162nd Brigade of Agim Bajrami, and it received its name, took the name of the deputy commander who lost his life in fighting the Serb security forces in August 1998. The commander was Iljas Djamil [phoen], and he died fighting the security forces and was replaced by Commander Zarko Cabil [phoen], nicknamed Cori [phoen]. Then we have the 163rd Brigade, or rather, there was the 163rd Brigade with Commander Eli Ziriza [phoen], and it was just a brigade on paper. Ahmed Kaciko [phoen] was the commander who died fighting against the Serbian police, but the commander later on was Eli Riza [phoen], as I said, and he was a former policeman.

Q. Very well.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, I don't think you have to read all the documents in that detail. But how can we recognise that this document is a RDB document which dates back up to 1999, without any stamps or without any date?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a document which was compiled on the basis of gathered information during 1998 and 1999. They are operation reports and work in the field, on that basis. I have a piece of paper here which I received, so compiled by the state security sector.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness speak into the microphone, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In preparing for this trial, the lawyers gave me this piece of paper to show to the Trial Chamber, to show ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁵ that the documents here are original, and this was issued from the state security on the 22nd of June, 2005. So this is just a diagram. In the documents of the operative zone of Nerodimlje, and there are quite a few of those - I think several tabs here, in fact, deal with that matter - have the dates on them, the dates of the documents, when they were compiled and on the basis of what information. But this testifies to their authenticity.

JUDGE KWON: That kind of letter should have been included in this exhibit and translated. Does this letter say that this document, this very RDB document, is included in that bunch of documents offered by the state security?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: I'd like to have this letter translated and exhibited.

Mr. Nice?

MR. NICE: Certainly. It's obviously a document we should see. I don't know if it's been provided to us in any other way. I don't know if the material contained or said to be identified in this letter is material that's been subject to requests by us or by other teams. It's a totally unsatisfactory way of dealing with evidence, because basically, as yesterday with another witness in another section, this witness is trying to produce material that is basically produced by other people.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I'm obviously behind everyone here, because I've forgotten what the witness has told us was his connection with the ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁶ State Security Service.

Mr. Janicevic, can you tell me your link with the State Security Service.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The RDB was in a ministry until a few years ago, until 2001. Therefore, the links were firm, close. All the information that the public security received, all their operative reports and everything with respect to the actions of terrorist groups in the area, that is to say, in the area of my own secretariat, were sent in to the State Security Service, which then, on the basis of that information and those facts, compiled reports and made their estimates of the security situation on the basis of that material. They issued collective reports.

JUDGE BONOMY: I understand that, but how do you happen to have the reports, or the documents?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy --

JUDGE BONOMY: Please let the witness answer my question. How do you happen to have the document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Belgrade, while I was being proofed, the lawyer gave them to me, the lawyer who proofed me. He gave me copies of the document.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, at the moment, I don't see any link between you and these documents. But perhaps it can now be clarified by questions and answers.

JUDGE KWON: Who were the lawyers that gave you these documents? You mean associates of the accused? ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁷

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: So it is not you but they who got these documents from the security service? Am I right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course it was they. They were provided at their application, at their request.

JUDGE KWON: So this letter was addressed to those lawyers?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: I think now I understand. Mr. Milosevic, if you clarify this matter further, if necessary.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just had a brief look while it was on the overhead projector. I saw that the letter was addressed to Mr. Raicevic, who is one of my associates in Belgrade, just as Ognjanovic, Tomanovic, and Rakic are my associates who regularly come here. They filed an application, as they are entitled to, for RDB documents to be provided to them.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, the first thing you have to do when producing a document is to lay foundation of it; how you got possession of it and how can you prove the authenticity of that document, et cetera. So you should have laid that foundation first of all. Let us go on. Just a second. Judge Bonomy.

JUDGE BONOMY: It's the link between this witness and the document that really matters, and we don't seem to have that at the moment. How is it that he in his professional life would come across this document? That's what we need -- at least, it's what I need to know.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You just took the words out of my ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁸ mouth, Mr. Bonomy. I was about to say that when I was interrupted. Mr. Janicevic was chief of the Secretariat of the Interior, that means the highest place, leader of the police.

JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues]... from you, I want to hear it from the witness, and I don't want to hear it from the witness through leading questions. I want a genuine, spontaneous response from the witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, you already got that answer at the very beginning, when this witness was talking about his career record. And this is one of the things --

JUDGE BONOMY: Get on with asking the questions, bearing in mind that I obviously have not, probably through my weakness, made the necessary link. Please make it for me again.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, did you used to be chief of the Secretariat of the Interior for Urosevac?

A. Yes.

Q. In which period were you chief of Urosevac SUP?

A. 15 June 1995 to 15 April 1999.

Q. Does this information relate to your territory, the area of responsibility of your Secretariat of the Interior?

A. Absolutely.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Have I established the link sufficiently, Mr. Bonomy?

JUDGE BONOMY: No. You've shown no basis for his using these ⁴⁴⁵⁴⁹ documents during his professional life.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, when did you see this document first?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was common practice while I was chief of the Secretariat of the Interior to have daily briefings involving chiefs of sections and chiefs of SUP. We had a representative of the state security sector in our area, and we exchanged information that was collected on a daily basis.

JUDGE KWON: That's not an answer to my question. My question was: Is it when you were proofed that you had seen this document for the first time, or did you see this document in 1999?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this form, I saw the document for the first time during proofing, but I know about 99.99 per cent of the contents from the time when I worked in the area earlier.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... relevant. He could have given evidence without the aid of a document and we needn't be burdened by a document the providence of which is entirely uncertain.

JUDGE BONOMY: And all it becomes is a form of leading question, because this is material produced by someone else that the witness is just reading from.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, can we move on to matters which the witness can deal with with his personal experience.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Certainly, but I assert that this is also something that the witness can talk about from his personal experience, because without any leading questions on my part, the witness ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁰ explained a couple of minutes ago that he personally, and his subordinates in the SUP of Urosevac, collected information on the ground, passed it on to the State Security Service, and the State Security Service exchanged information with them. And this document is one of many documents, one of many reports, compiled by the State Security Service based on the information provided by his organs. I don't see what's unclear.

JUDGE BONOMY: The last bit is the bit we don't know. He's only seeing this for the first time because he's involved in these proceedings. There's nothing about this document to indicate that it's official.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is a document that was provided from the archives of the State Security Service at the request of my associates, or rather, the institution that is named -- that has been renamed Documentation and Information Agency. So this document in this form --

JUDGE BONOMY: What is it, this document? Is it somewhere in this -- is it described somewhere in the letter? It's not in English, so I can't read it and make any -- I can't understand it as it is, and there's nothing on it to indicate it's official, and I don't know if there's something in this letter that tells us with some authority what it was and how it was compiled and in what circumstances. Now, if that's all there, then please bring it out. And if not, let's move on to something that you can authenticate.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, that's precisely what I asked for, for the letter to be given to me to have a look, because I don't have the letter at this moment before me. The witness has it. I only saw it ⁴⁴⁵⁵¹ on the overhead projector. I didn't have time to deal with these technicalities with the witness. Can I get the letter to see it?

JUDGE KWON: Yes. Hand it over to the accused.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is from the Council of Ministers of Serbia and Montenegro, National Council for Cooperation with the ICTY. So my associates went through the regular channels they had to go through, this council, and it is addressed to attorney-at-law Moma Raicevic, who is a member of my team, and it says: "Please find enclosed the documentation requested on the 24th of May, 2005. This documentation relates to the activities of the KLA, its crimes and its activities in the Nerodimlje zone. We herewith enclose 65 statements, collected materials of studies, documentation related to murders," and so on and so forth, structure of the KLA, manuals, written orders, et cetera. All this documentation is listed. All of it is signed by the secretary of the National Council -- of the Ministerial Council, rather, through which my associates had to make this application.

JUDGE BONOMY: So what does it say this document is?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is a document that says: "We herewith provide documents related to the Nerodimlje zone." That means all the documents available to them related to the KLA activities --

JUDGE BONOMY: It's obvious you don't know what this document is, so let's move on to something sensible that the witness can actually speak about and authenticate.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, you may put questions very briefly in ^{44552 BLANK PAGE 44553} relation to this document. We'll mark the very tab for identification, pending the authenticity is proved. Please go on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. I just wish to add that, according to my information, Mr. Nice has all these documents in his possession, because before anything was given to my associates, everything was provided to Mr. Nice's office.

JUDGE KWON: That's not an issue. Please get on with the evidence.

MR. NICE: Probably not correct. And it's not the first time that these observations get made and I have to devote some resources to see whether they're accurate or not and it leads nowhere. We may have been provided with this material elsewhere, I simply don't know, but it doesn't seem to be helpful to raise it now.

JUDGE KWON: Let's move on with your question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you have shown us the first page where we see this diagram. In 1998, when this Nerodimlje zone, and in 1999, when this Nerodimlje zone was established, did you know about this data or did you just find out from the lawyer who provided you with this document?

A. We knew about every brigade, about every staff, before they were actually established.

Q. Let us not go into all of these details. Turn to page 6, or 7 maybe, titled "Village Staffs."

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could you please put it on the overhead projector. ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁴

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Have you seen this? What does it say? Village Staffs attached to the 161st Brigade.

A. Correct.

Q. Let us disregard all the other staffs. What is written in the middle column, number 3?

A. "Staff of Racak village, commander Bilali Afet, nicknamed Qofa.

Q. So it says: "Racak, commander, Afet Bilali Qofa, also known as Qofa. Is Rance also listed?

A. Village of Rance is also there

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, could you indicate the part with your pointer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Number 3. This isn't numbered, but it's in the middle column. Number 3 is village Racak staff.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell us: Which of these villages are in the immediate vicinity?

A. Rance, three kilometres to the west of Racak. Laniste, four kilometres south-west of Racak. Zborce, two kilometres to the north of Racak. Crnoljevo, a kilometre and a half from Racak. Karacica is a bit further away, about five kilometres from Racak. Petrovo and Krajmirovce, seven and a half kilometres. Manastirce, seven to eight kilometres away. Malopoljce, three kilometres away. Burnik is a bit further away. Jezerce is eight kilometres from Racak.

Q. So this 161st Brigade covers Racak and the surrounding villages?

A. Correct. Correct. The headquarters of the staff of the 161st ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁵ Brigade was in Rance.

Q. Which one?

A. Rance.

Q. A kilometre and a half or two away from Racak?

A. Right. All these sub-staffs, as they were called, or village staffs, were linked to the command of the 161st Brigade.

Q. This was tab 10. We won't deal with it any more. Turn to 10.1. What does it depict? What do we see under tab 10.1? It is a series of photos.

MR. NICE: Two points, please, if I may. If we look back to the sometimes it may be thought artful method of questioning by the accused, we see that he says at line 14 on page 21, Have you seen this? What does it say? Village staffs attached to ... The answer is Correct. And then we've gone through the chart, it being quite unclear to me whether the witness is giving any evidence himself now of these matters or if he's simply reading the chart out.

JUDGE BONOMY: He's reading the chart.

JUDGE KWON: My understanding is he confirms the content of it. We can clarify.

MR. NICE: Well, I'm sorry to be difficult, but I reviewed -- incidentally, I reviewed the first four pages of yesterday's evidence overnight and it was striking to me again how easily we are -- not we are allowing, but how easily the accused gets away with effect leading questions time and again because we just can't be resisting them on every occasion. But the rule against leading questions does have a value and it ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁶ has value because you the Court need to know what is the evidential status of the answers being given. And at the moment it's clear, for example, on this last passage, that there is uncertainty amongst the professional lawyers and judges in Court as to what is actually happening.

JUDGE BONOMY: The point about that uncertainty, Mr. Nice, is that it will be held against the questioner. The whole point about the rule against leading questions is that the answers are of little value. And therefore, if evidence is extracted in that way, then it will be weak evidence so far as the questioner is concerned. And I, for one, am just exhausted trying to make the point, because it just never gets taken. And there's a limit to how much you can do to try to persuade someone conducting his own case to try to do it with a modicum of common sense.

MR. NICE: I understand Your Honour's position. I'll try to be conservative in my objections. But on the other hand, I am troubled by what I read or reread of yesterday's evidence.

JUDGE KWON: There's merit in Mr. Nice's point. Let us move on, bearing that point in your mind.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, that has -- that's pointless, because in lists of documents, Mr. Kwon, I just identified the document that I want the witness to comment upon and to say whether that is correct or incorrect. I read what it says at the top, that these are the village staffs of the 161st Brigade. That is what is written there, in order to identify the document. And then he was the one who was enumerating them, explaining where they are, how far away.

JUDGE KWON: I think we have made the point very clear. Let us ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁷ move on with the questions.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Mr. Janicevic, what is this photo documentation, these photo files in tab 10.1? What does it represent?

A. The photo documentation in tab 10.1 is part of the on-site investigation conducted on the 28th of September, 1998 in Jezerce.

MR. NICE: Before we put these pictures on and I can see what they're like, relevance. What's the relevance of this to this trial? If it's going to be suggested that the KLA did bad things in 1998, it may well be this isn't challenged. But what's the relevance of this material at this trial at this stage?

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I don't want to lead, so let's look at these pictures. We don't have to look at the first page, but let's look at the next page. Just put it on the ELMO. You don't want me to lead, I shouldn't put leading questions, so just have a look at the next page. What have you got on that? What are these photographs? Let the witness tell you. Because if you let me put the question, then you're going to say: Ah, did I ask him whether it's a church or a mosque or whatever.

JUDGE BONOMY: Let me ask the witness: Were you part of the on-site investigation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not personally, but my staff workers were. My crime technicians and scene-of-crime officers.

JUDGE BONOMY: When did you first see the photograph? ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁸

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Immediately after the on-site investigation. I cannot remember the exact date, but say two or three days later.

JUDGE BONOMY: In my view, these are relevant, and I don't see any objection. In the face of the failure of the Prosecution to concede these events, then the accused is entitled to prove them.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, we won't put the first photograph on the overhead projector, but please put the second photograph on. Let me not say anything about what is on the photograph. Then the third one. Put the second one first on the ELMO. Can you see that?

A. I can see it.

Q. What are these photographs? This is a set of four photographs. What is depicted there?

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness's microphone please be adjusted. The interpreters cannot hear him.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, could you speak into the microphone, please, when you speak.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the first photograph, in the upper left-hand corner, is a trench that the terrorists dug at the entrance to Jezerce from the direction of Nerodimlje. On the second photograph, in the lower left-hand corner, there is yet another trench that was dug as an extension of the upper trench, in the direction of Nerodimlje, next to the road.

The third photograph, in the upper right-hand corner is a barrier ⁴⁴⁵⁵⁹ on the road, or rather, it's a hole that was dug and then planks were placed over it. It was supposed to prevent the police from entering the village, because if vehicles tried to get in, they would fall into the hole.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, what were these trenches used for? And do you have some knowledge of your own from the relevant time what they were used for and what kind of activity was carried out from there?

A. Assaults on police patrols in the area, and possibly for defence from the police that would take measures in order to arrest the terrorist groups that were in the area.

Q. Could you please look at the next page and tell us very briefly, what are the photographs on the next page? Again, there is a set of four photographs.

A. The first photograph in the upper left-hand corner is a bunker. The second one is again an obstacle on the road.

Q. Similar to --

A. Yes, to what I showed a few moments ago. In the upper right-hand corner it's the same thing, before it was removed. And the last photograph is a terrorist who was killed in a clash with the security forces.

Q. Can uniforms be seen on the photographs where the killed persons are?

A. Yes. In these photographs, we can see their uniforms too, with insignia of the KLA. ⁴⁴⁵⁶⁰

Q. Could you please take a look at the next photograph. What is on that photograph? You can see part of a red vehicle here, unless I'm leading when I say that you can see part of a vehicle.

A. It's a Lada Niva. Rockets can be seen there for a hand-held rocket launcher. And there are also two hand-grenades and some ammunition of 7.9 millimetres. On the right-hand side is a rifle, Chinese-made. That can be seen.

Q. Look at the next photograph, the next page, rather. What can be seen on these photographs?

A. On the first photograph, in the upper left-hand corner, you can see equipment that was found at their headquarters, as well as uniforms and caps with KLA insignia. On the left-hand side, in the bottom, is part of the body of a killed terrorist. On the right-hand side is a bunker in the lower left-hand corner.

Q. Look at the next page, please. There are only three photographs there.

A. There's a trench on the first photograph, from which the terrorists attacked members of the police and army, and from there they also kidnapped citizens who were moving along that road. In the middle photograph there is a parapet in the rocks. And on the third one is a machine-gun, behind which we can see the parapet.

Q. Are all of these photographs from the on-site investigation after the terrorist action that was carried out on your territory that you saw immediately after they were made, and does this have to do with the ⁴⁴⁵⁶¹ investigation that was carried out?

A. This is only part of the photographs that were taken.

Q. But the ones that we showed, did you see all of them at the time?

A. Yes, I saw all of them at the time.

Q. To the best of your recollection, how many brigades were there in the Nerodimlje area?

A. To the best of my recollection, the so-called operational zone of Nerodimlje had two brigades and one brigade that was being established; 161, 162, and 163 was only on paper, because it didn't function because there weren't enough interested people in the territory of the municipality for which it had been established.

Q. Now tell us where and when you came to this information about the establishment of the Nerodimlje zone and those units that they honour by calling them brigades.

A. We got this information through operative work, through police work on the ground, through friendly connections, through persons who collaborated with us and who were part of the top echelons of these organisations in October 1998.

Q. Is there any information contained in tab 11 which speaks of this Nerodimlje Operative Zone of the KLA, including names? And what do you know about this information? What does it constitute?

A. Tab 11?

Q. Yes, tab 11.

MR. KAY: [Previous translation continues]... be an exhibit?

JUDGE KWON: Yes. The same thing can be said in relation to tab ⁴⁴⁵⁶² 11 as tab 10. You didn't see this document in 1999; instead, you saw this document for the first time only recently?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please. Recently I saw the document in this form. However, the information that is contained here, I don't know whether you have a translation, but there's information here about the brigades and then the text reads as follows --

THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please be asked to slow down.

JUDGE KWON: I think I know the answer.

JUDGE BONOMY: But the -- can you help us by telling us what the document actually is and how it was compiled?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know how it was compiled before, but it was probably compiled the same way now too. All operative knowledge, all information that members of the public and State Security Service collect are sent to a single point.

JUDGE BONOMY: But you say that this information was in a document, and now it appears in this Court in some other form, in a different document. Is that the position?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This information was sent in its original form to the person who processed all the information and who compiled this document. This has to do with the establishment and functioning of this so-called operational zone of Nerodimlje. So this document was compiled on the basis of several documents that were collected during 1998 and 1999.

JUDGE BONOMY: So who compiled this document, then?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The state security sector. Probably ^{44563 BLANK PAGE 44564} they're people who work in analysis.

JUDGE BONOMY: I have to say it sounds to me as if you're speculating about what happened, you don't actually know, because you've never seen a document in this form before.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I saw this document during my preparations, but over the past 30 years, I saw perhaps 300 such documents, this type of document, that is.

JUDGE BONOMY: So have you any idea why we're not looking at the ones that you were working with in your professional life?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What do you mean by saying why you are not looking at something that I had not prepared? I don't understand the question, really.

JUDGE BONOMY: You were familiar with documents which gave the sort of information which is in this document. This is one you've never seen. And what I'm wondering is why we haven't got the ones that you normally saw in your everyday, professional life. Have you any idea, or is that something you can't help with?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The documents that I saw during my professional career - let me repeat what I said a few moments ago - were all submitted to a higher instance. As far as terrorism is concerned, in this situation, the higher instance is the state security sector, and all relevant information was sent to them, indicating that there were terrorist groups that were active, that they were engaged in criminal activity, et cetera. Everything that had to do with them was sent further on to the state security sector, or a particular department in this case. ⁴⁴⁵⁶⁵ Then they would send it further up to their top echelons of the state security. And then, on the basis of all the documents that they would obtain from a particular area, they would compile a comprehensive piece of information containing descriptions of everything that was going on.

JUDGE BONOMY: Now, prior -- yes, I understand. Prior to being proofed for this case, had you ever seen such a document, one of these comprehensive documents?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I saw many such documents, but I saw this particular document too. If I could --

JUDGE BONOMY: You saw this one when?

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter could not hear the witness.

JUDGE BONOMY: We didn't get the answer to that. You saw this document when?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During my preparations for this trial.

JUDGE BONOMY: We're going around in circles here, and I appreciate -- unproductive circles, but it demonstrates at the moment a lack of understanding on your part of what this document is. If you, in your everyday, professional life, saw comprehensive compilations, compiled within the State Security Service office, what I would like to know is why we're not working from them and why we're working from a document that you never saw in your professional life and you actually don't know how it was compiled. Now, can you answer that question? And if you can't, just say so.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document was compiled on the ⁴⁴⁵⁶⁶ basis of information that members of the service collected. I repeat: Even my information is contained here, information that I personally compiled. That is contained in this document. And I don't understand --

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, you may not understand the rule of evidence. Let's move on, briefly. We'll treat these tabs equally, the same way as we did in relation to tab 10.

Move on, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you said just now that in this document we find information that you personally provided to a superior authority, either to your colleagues in the RDB or elsewhere; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Well, you said that a moment ago. Now, what information did you have at that time which is contained in this document, what information did you have at your disposal at the time when these events took place?

A. This is information of the initial stages of the forming of terrorist groups in the Urosevac area, Likud 2, and this is a summary of the information received, information about the establishment of the 161st Brigade staff and the 167th Brigade staff, their overall activity in the area covered by the secretariat. The way they were financed, for instance, the way they collected money for the purchase of weapons, how they sent out their terrorists to Albania in order to procure weapons, for instance.

Q. Very well. Now, to what extent do you have direct information, you yourself, collected by your staff and your collaborators, are ⁴⁴⁵⁶⁷ contained in this comprehensive report?

A. Well, over 80 per cent, I'd say.

Q. So that is information from your own area which you amassed in the line of duty, your professional duty?

A. Yes.

Q. And what about the source information that was sent out to higher instances, the DB, for example, and other ministries?

A. The source information, original information, was sent out and a copy of that piece of information would stay in the RDB or the MUP.

Q. Very well, thank you. Tell me, please: Where was the staff located? So I'm not asking about this document any more, because, as Mr. Kwon said, we would deal with it in the way he stated, once we establish whether it is an authentic document or not. Tell me: Where was the staff of the 161st Brigade and its headquarters located, and who was its commander?

A. The staff and headquarters of the 161 Brigade of the KLA was in the village of Rance. In the initial stages of its inception that's where it was, and for one month after it had been established, that's where it was. The commander of the staff was Muzilica [phoen], nicknamed Cecica [phoen]. And towards the end of 1998, the headquarters of the staff was moved to the village of Petrovo which is also in the Stimlje municipality.

Q. Tell us about the municipality of Stimlje. Is it part of the territory of the collection of municipalities covered by the SUP of Urosevac, at whose head you were?

A. Yes. ⁴⁴⁵⁶⁸

Q. Including all the villages, all the villages that you're mentioning now, does it come under your area of responsibility as chief of police for the area?

A. Yes.

Q. This terrorist brigade, was it active only in your own area or was it active partially in other areas as well?

A. From time to time, it was active in Lipljani and Suva Reka, those two areas.

Q. And where was its action focussed on?

A. Predominantly in the Stimlje municipality and that general area, or rather, in the area of the Crnoljevska gorge, which is where the main road running from Pristina to Prizren lies, via Stimlje, in 1998. And in 1998, we had almost daily provocations and attacks along this road which was used by military vehicles, police patrols, military transport, civilian cars as well, passenger vehicles, and so on. There were many casualties, a lot of vehicles damaged, and so on.

Q. All right. Let's move on and be even more specific. Tell us where the sub-staff of this brigade was located in the village of Racak that you just mentioned.

A. The sub-staff of the brigade was located in the house belonging to Mustafa Mehmed [phoen], I think that's what the proprietor's name was, in the village of Racak.

Q. And who was the commander of that staff in the village of Racak?

A. Afet Bilali, nicknamed Qofa,

Q. Tell us now, please, Mr. Janicevic -- or rather, take a look at ⁴⁴⁵⁶⁹ the following tabs, that is to say, tab 12 -- let's take them in their order. Tab 12 first, which is a report compiled by -- who compiled the report? You read it out to avoid me asking leading questions. What does it say at the top? What does it say in the upper left-hand corner?

A. May I just take a moment to find the document.

Q. It's tab 12.

A. Yes. The report was compiled --

Q. Take a look at what it says in the upper left-hand corner. It says: "Republic of Serbia MUP, Urosevac SUP." The fact that it says Republic of Serbia MUP and Urosevac SUP, is that the SUP that you headed?

A. Yes, that's right.

JUDGE BONOMY: Is this a document we've seen already?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, it is. However --

JUDGE BONOMY: Why are we going over it again with this witness?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Because the most responsible police official is here, under whose leadership these people collected this information.

MR. KAY: It's tab 216 in the Jasovic binder. If we could sort out tab 11 at this stage. Is it going to be MFI'd, Your Honour?

JUDGE KWON: Yes, pending the authenticity is resolved and pending translation.

MR. KAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, as head of the Secretariat of the Interior and the number-one man leading these authorised personnel, can you confirm the ⁴⁴⁵⁷⁰ authenticity of the contents of this report and the legality in which it was compiled?

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you.

JUDGE BONOMY: How do you do that? Tell me how you do that. Were you there when the report was being compiled?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This report was being -- was compiled in November 1998 and I read through it personally and sent it on for further work to be done.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Would this kind of report have to be shown you? Did it have to be shown you?

A. Yes. That was the general obligation. Every piece of information, every report, even reports of lesser importance, had to come to me.

Q. In tab 13, do we have another report by authorised personnel belonging to your SUP, the SUP that you headed?

JUDGE KWON: I guess this has been already exhibited.

MR. KAY: 221.

JUDGE KWON: I beg your pardon?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Kay.

MR. KAY: 221.

JUDGE KWON: 221.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁴⁵⁷¹

Q. Can you confirm that this report was compiled in keeping with the rules of service governing your Secretariat of the Interior, or rather, the Ministry of the Interior, and that the information contained therein is exact and true?

A. Yes.

MR. NICE: I do have to observe the formulation of the last part of that question. It's getting by, but ...

JUDGE KWON: Having dealt with this matter already with Mr. Jasovic, I don't think it's necessary, but let us move on. What's the question, Mr. Milosevic?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you, as head of the Secretariat of the Interior -- or to avoid asking you a leading question, let me put it this way: Once you receive a report of this kind, did you undertake any steps to check out the information provided, to attempt to look at another source to check out the information or to check out the information contained on the spot, in the actual location?

A. Of course that every report was checked and investigated and verified through a number of sources, and each operative, every member of the State Security Service, had his associates and friendly ties and informants as well. For this kind of report to be written and compiled, it had to be checked out according to many sources and many times. And this kind of report was sent on to the State Security Service.

JUDGE BONOMY: Tell me how you did that, when you got this report. What would you do to check out its accuracy? ⁴⁴⁵⁷²

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Before a report of this kind is compiled, is written out --

JUDGE BONOMY: No, no. Once you've got it, what was it you did, you personally, as the chief, to check out its accuracy?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm trying to explain the process to you. Before such a report is ever compiled, the operative workers dealing with each subject or problem, if you like, write an official report, a short official note about what they're doing and how far they have come. And then that is verified through a number of sources, through the State Security Service's sources. And then, once they have been verified and checked, this kind of report is compiled, which is sent on to the State Security Service ultimately.

JUDGE BONOMY: Give me a concrete example. What sort of thing would happen when the original note was written here? What check would you personally carry out? Because it's you that's saying that you carried out the checks to vouch for the accuracy and truthfulness of this statement.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A report compiled in this way was sent out to the State Security Service, the State Security Service department, and then they carried on with their verification of this information. Although, before, it was already checked out and verified before it was compiled in this way, and that was done by higher instances than me; the chief of police or the chief of the crime prevention department. So it had to pass by three or four levels before it reached the head of the SUP. And this is the ultimate stage, which is then sent ⁴⁴⁵⁷³ on up above.

JUDGE BONOMY: Tell me to whom this would go, this -- or the previous -- I don't know now which -- I thought you wanted me to concentrate on the previous, the earlier draft, the first note. Who would it go to to be checked before the report was written?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Before the report was written, it was verified by the commanders of the police stations, the heads of department, and the heads of the administrative departments. And each operative --

JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues]... before it was ever written. Who would it go to and which police offices before it was written?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Leading policemen; the chief of the police stations or deputy chiefs of police stations in charge of this kind of thing.

JUDGE BONOMY: Your staff are working in a police station. So which other police stations would this go to before it became a report? How many other police stations would it have gone through to be checked, according to you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think you understood me.

JUDGE BONOMY: Obviously not.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The policemen, policemen, when they go in the field and talk to the operatives, when they come back, they write a report or what is known as an official note. That official note is sent out to the assistant or deputy commander. The deputy commander ^{44574 BLANK PAGE 44575} then assesses whether the official note should be sent on or whether it should stay there. If he has information saying that it is accurate, it stays. If not, it is rejected. If it is sent on, it is sent on to the inspectors in charge of the lines of work that check it out further still. And if they confirm its accuracy, then they go on to write this kind of report, which is sent to the chief of the department and then sent up to the chief of SUP.

JUDGE BONOMY: Okay. So we've now established that this all happens within the one police office, I think. Now, what sort of check would an officer, a more senior officer, make on the note --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy --

JUDGE BONOMY: Please don't interrupt. What sort of check would the next officer up from Mr. Jasovic make before processing the matter further?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it's like this: Operative work is a very complex job, to gather and amass information. For instance, this piece of information, the officer in charge of that police officer, he has his operative positions on the ground. And for every information that comes in, every paragraph, for example, here Zejn Osmani is mentioned. He goes on the spot in the field to check out whether this man Zejn Osmani is really there, what he does, what he's doing.

JUDGE BONOMY: Jasovic's superior, when he gets the note, he will go out to check that this person is actually there; is that what you're saying?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not the superior Jasovic. The SUP, ⁴⁴⁵⁷⁶ the Ministry of the Interior, there is a line of work according to the crime in the area, whether we're dealing with theft, killings, terrorist acts or whatever the type of crime. There are different categories of crimes, I don't want to have to enumerate them all now. And every piece of information, every official note, goes to the source, to the operative worker there, who checks this piece of information out. In this case, Jasovic and --

JUDGE BONOMY: I'm asking you to take this concrete example and tell me who, after Jasovic compiled his first note, would actually do something to check it out and what he would do.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Jasovic did not compile the first official note. Jasovic worked as an inspector. Jasovic received information from the policeman on the ground, and then he verified and checked out that information. And on the basis of the information he gained and the official note, he would compile, go on to compile this kind of report. This report was then sent on up --

JUDGE BONOMY: So you're saying Mr. Jasovic did not obtain the information which is contained in this report. Have I got that correct?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Partially correct. He did partially. He checked out the information he received. And on the basis of confirmation of that information, compiled this report.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I would be very grateful if someone at the break will identify where in Mr. Jasovic's evidence he told us that that was the way in which he went about his work.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just before we break, one question, ⁴⁴⁵⁷⁷ if I may.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, Mr. Bonomy mentioned a police station. Tell us: How many police stations were there within the frameworks of your Secretariat of the Interior?

A. Four police stations.

Q. I didn't hear you. Could you repeat.

A. Four.

Q. So you say four police stations came under your Secretariat of the Interior; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, do you have tab 13 in front of you, report by Mr. Jasovic?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: After Mr. Jasovic produced this document, there was no further mechanism to check the veracity of this document; am I right? This is the final report on the part of that police station?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the final -- Jasovic wasn't in the police station. Jasovic worked in the department for crime prevention. He was an inspector there. This report was sent on further to the State Security Service, the RDB, for further processing.

JUDGE KWON: That's the answer I like to hear. This is the final report.

We'll adjourn for 20 minutes. ⁴⁴⁵⁷⁸

--- Recess taken at 10.41 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Simply to respond to the question of His Honour Judge Bonomy shortly before the break. I haven't been able to find a passage of the kind he wondered if we could identify. My recollection is rather to the contrary, and indeed I have found, although I've now temporarily misplaced a passage where he gave an explanation that the Chamber may recall of people either coming voluntarily or being brought to the police station for him to speak to, and the clear implication from his evidence as a whole was that it was all personal contacts from him and others at the police station in an interview setting. He never gave -- to my recollection, he never gave evidence to a contrary effect or to the effect that he was relying on derivative information.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Nice. Mr. Milosevic, please proceed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you just said that your Secretariat of Interior in Urosevac had four police stations.

A. Correct.

Q. One of those four police stations -- in fact, was one of them the police station in Stimlje?

A. Yes. We had police stations in Stimlje, Urosevac, Strpce and Kacanik.

Q. How many people worked in the Stimlje police station? ⁴⁴⁵⁷⁹

A. Around 50, together with the senior personnel.

Q. How large a territory is covered by Stimlje police station?

A. The entire municipality of Stimlje, about 20 or so villages, including Stimlje.

Q. Did policemen who worked at that police station move around the entire municipality of Stimlje, including all the villages?

A. Yes, until 1998. Until mid-1998, I should say.

Q. And afterwards, what happened?

A. After mid-1998, terrorist actions and activities began. Some villages were held by terrorists and clashes occurred, threats, provocations. It was not safe for the police to enter all the villages.

Q. A moment ago Mr. Nice quoted Witness Jasovic as saying that he interviewed people who had been brought to the police station. Who would bring those people to the police station, on what account, and how would they end up being interviewed by Jasovic?

A. People would pass through police checkpoints, and some of them would behave suspiciously, some would be suspected to be KLA terrorists, some would be suspected of being wanted for various crimes and offences, and they would be brought in, taken into custody. Not only Jasovic, but all the other officers were involved in the work of elucidating these crimes.

Q. On what grounds would those people be brought in? On the basis of what information? Would that be an order issued by the police station commander or operative information?

A. A list of suspects would be drawn up based on operative ⁴⁴⁵⁸⁰ information. There would be a list of persons suspected of having committed a criminal offence or being involved in a terrorist group. IDs would be checked, and those people would be brought in for interviews.

Q. Those interviews would then be conducted by police inspectors at the headquarters of the secretariat?

A. Yes, and they were not limited to Jasovic and Sparavalo.

Q. How many inspectors were there?

A. In the department for crime prevention, there were a number of inspectors. All of them were involved in this work, including Jasovic and Sparavalo.

Q. This information under tab 13, is that an original document of your Secretariat of the Interior?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Did you read this report at the time when it was drawn up?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Did each of these reports have to be submitted to you for your consideration?

A. Yes, all of them had to be submitted to me, and I decided to what authorities they would be forwarded, whether to the State Security Service or the staff of the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Serbia, or elsewhere.

Q. You mean the staff in Serbia, the ministry staff in Serbia?

A. Yes.

Q. We'll move now to tab 14. We have a statement here. Is that an original document of your secretariat? ⁴⁴⁵⁸¹

A. Yes.

JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]... Jasovic binder?

MR. KAY: 133.

JUDGE KWON: Which was admitted already?

MR. KAY: Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Kay.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you have occasion to read this statement at the time when it was taken from the person signed?

A. Yes. I think -- in fact, I am certain that I read this statement.

JUDGE KWON: You should have a translation, then. Could the court deputy find out. Let us proceed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Does this statement make reference to any terrorist activity or the presence of people involved in terrorist activities in the village of Racak?

A. The person who gave this statement claims that they saw Afet Bilali, Rifat Imeri and Nusret Musliu wearing KLA uniforms. All of these people were natives of Racak.

Q. Would you please read paragraph 4. I don't want to spend too much time on this. What does he say? The paragraph begins with the words: "In the month of December ..."

A. "In December this year, in the village of Racak, I saw Afet Bilali Rifat Imeri and Nusret Musliu wearing uniforms with KLA insignia and carrying automatic rifles. I was in Racak for the last time on the 18th ⁴⁴⁵⁸² of December, 1998, where, on the road leading to the mosque in Racak, I saw four persons wearing KLA uniforms, or uniforms with KLA insignia, and carrying automatic rifles. I recognised Isljama Imeri from Racak village."

Q. Now, on the basis of similar statements, would you establish the composition, the strength, and the type of activities engaged in by the KLA in a particular area?

A. Yes. But also on the basis of other types of information we would receive, not only in the statements.

Q. Very well. Look at tab 15. Do you see there a statement that is another document from your Secretariat of the Interior?

A. Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Is it not also admitted through Jasovic? If so, what's the point of going all over it again?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The point is that Mr. Janicevic, who was chief of that Secretariat of the Interior, might confirm whether this is an authentic document of his Secretariat of the Interior in view of the information contained.

JUDGE KWON: Ask specific questions which Mr. Janicevic could answer with his personal knowledge and which cannot be dealt with through Mr. Jasovic. Time is very precious.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, did you read this statement at the time when it was taken?

A. Yes. ⁴⁴⁵⁸³

Q. Did it have any importance to you, as chief of the secretariat?

A. Of course it had importance. We had a number of terrorists whose presence was established in the village of Racak, headed by the commander of the Main Staff.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Kay, could you give us a comprehensive knowledge how much it's duplicated with Jasovic exhibits?

MR. KAY: We've tracked -- tab 15 is 1.55 in Jasovic. Tab 16 is tab 1.8 in Jasovic, and that's as far as it goes. We haven't been able to find any more.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. Please let us know as soon as you find out.

MR. KAY: Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. KAY: There is a translation of tab 14 in the Jasovic binders. Ms. Higgins has done copies.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Let's move on very quickly. We dealt with these statements and report already.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In that case, I will be asking only short questions.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, under tab 16 there is another statement. Is that an authentic document of your Secretariat of the Interior? Please look at the statement.

A. I'm looking at it now. It is an authentic document.

Q. Did you read it at the time when it was drawn up?

A. Yes, I did. It was taken together with members of the state ⁴⁴⁵⁸⁴ security sector.

Q. On what basis do you claim that?

A. Because among the signatures we see the signature of Srboljub Vojinovic, who was representing the state security sector in Urosevac.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, did we not deal with all the statements or reports taken by or written by Mr. Jasovic? Did we? And this should have been included in Jasovic exhibits or in Stevanovic exhibits, given the number tab 305. You should be aware of this.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but I have in front of me the former chief of Urosevac SUP, and I'm seeking confirmation of authenticity of documents originating from his secretariat, his former secretariat, and I'm asking him whether he had seen them at the time.

JUDGE KWON: Move on very quickly and get to Racak event as soon as possible.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I would ask you the same request about the statement in tab 17: Is that an authentic document of your secretariat?

A. Yes, it is.

MR. KAY: No record in Jasovic of tab 17, as far as we can see.

JUDGE KWON: How about Stevanovic? Please do so, yes. Thank you. Next question, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. NICE: Just pausing there. Tab 17, unless others have it, there is no translation.

While I'm on my feet: The translations that have been given out this morning I gather mean that we now have different translations of that ^{44585 BLANK PAGE 44586} document. I think this morning may be different from the one in the Jasovic binder. It's a small point, but it's something to have in mind. But in any case, no translation for 17 and we haven't seen this document before. I haven't yet been able to check whether the names are apparently significant.

JUDGE BONOMY: You're saying that there are translations given to you for which ones?

MR. NICE: I think it was 16.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: 16, and I think -- 15, I beg your pardon. 15. We've now got two different translations.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, are they materially different?

MR. NICE: I don't know yet, I haven't checked, but we're not being provided the same document. More significant, 17, no translation, is the problem for us.

JUDGE KWON: We don't have it either, but that can be sorted out later, whether they were the ones exhibited already or not. Let us move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Under tab 17 are persons listed from the village of Racak who are said to be members of the KLA?

A. Yes.

Q. What is the date?

A. 22nd November 1998.

Q. Have you already confirmed the authenticity of this document from ⁴⁴⁵⁸⁷ your secretariat?

A. Yes. It is an authentic document.

Q. Could you narrow down the area where this terrorist brigade was active?

A. The so-called 161st Terrorist Brigade of the KLA was active in the area of Stimlje and the area of Urosevac. The area of Stimlje covers the following villages: Racak, Petrovo, Belince, Crnoljevo, Laniste, Topilo, Devecak, Malopoljce, Muzicane, Racince [phoen], Petrovic, Gornje Godance, Donje Godance, Zborce and Petrastica. And of course Crnoljevo and the Crnoljevo gorge, the entire gorge.

Q. You just mentioned a moment ago that from the Crnoljevska gorge you see the road to Prizren.

A. Yes.

Q. In which area was this brigade of the KLA active?

A. Municipality of Kacanik and municipality of Strpce.

Q. Where were its headquarters?

A. In the village of Ivaja, area of Kacanik. The commander was Ibri Razi [phoen], also known as Bardi [phoen]. He also died in a fight with our security forces. He was replaced by Dzabir Zarko. In addition to that base of the brigade, which was in Ivaja, the brigade had its sub-staffs in villages. Vodenica, Bob, Icevac, Kovacevac, Dubrava, Slatina, and other villages where they also had their sub-staffs but with a smaller number of members.

JUDGE BONOMY: I think there's something missing from the transcript. Are we now dealing with a different brigade? ⁴⁴⁵⁸⁸

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I put a question that had to do with the 162nd Brigade, and a few moments ago we were dealing with the 161st Brigade. And what the witness said now --

JUDGE BONOMY: It doesn't appear in the transcript that you've moved on to the 162nd [Realtime transcript read in error "161nd"] Brigade, although it's obvious from the answers that we're dealing with something different. And indeed, the transcript is now compounded it by calling it the "161nd Brigade." It should be the 162nd Brigade.

JUDGE KWON: That having been clarified, let's go on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, please look at tab 18, or rather, 18, 18.1, 18.2, and so on. What kind of documents are these? Please look at 18.1. It is a statement taken from Adem Salahu, from the village of Bicevac, municipality of Kacanik. Jasovic and Sparavalo took the statement, as well as Nebojsa Djordjevic, who works for state security, and it was done, therefore, together with the RDB, the state security of the Republic. In this statement, we have a long list of KLA members, because they say that the following members took part in the KLA activities.

A. Yes.

Q. So this arrested KLA member gives a list of his colleagues from the KLA on several pages of this statement.

A. That's right.

JUDGE BONOMY: Can you tell us the circumstances in which this person came to give the statement?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This person was brought in to ⁴⁴⁵⁸⁹ custody by the police, or rather, brought in for an interview.

JUDGE BONOMY: For what?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The suspicion was that he was a member of the terrorist organisation of the KLA. Later on, as he made his statement and gave his interview, that proved to be true.

JUDGE BONOMY: And was action taken against him?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure. I cannot remember now, but I think that he was remanded into custody and handed over to the investigating judge.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: Is it usual for your inspector to take a statement together with a person from state security?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When terrorism is concerned, there were cases when statements were taken together, and it was advisable, because members of the State Security Service had more information about the terrorist organisations, groups, and individuals who were active in that way. That would make the statement proper and in that way the statement could lead to proceedings being initiated against such persons.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. At the time when this statement was taken, did you have the opportunity of seeing it, reading it?

A. Yes. I had the opportunity of seeing it, reading it, familiarising myself with its content, and it was also sent to the MUP headquarters, in addition to being sent further on to the State Security Service. ⁴⁴⁵⁹⁰

Q. Tell me now, Mr. Janicevic: What does the document contained in tab 18.2 relate to?

MR. KAY: Can tab 18.1 be an exhibit?

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. KAY: And can tab 17 be --

JUDGE KWON: No. Was it not included in the Jasovic binder?

MR. KAY: I haven't been able to find it.

JUDGE KWON: We have to deal with it. We have to hear from Mr. Nice on this matter.

MR. NICE: 18.1 is, to my recollection, clearly new. I could be wrong, but I simply don't recall seeing any kind of statement with a list of names of that length. I don't at the moment recall and can't find the person named Adem Salahu being dealt with. We don't have a translation and it may be that this one should be marked for identification at most at this stage. But I would also ask the Chamber to consider requiring of the accused to identify any of these names on the list that he says are of particular significance. Of course, we can go through the names and calculate for him which, if any, of these names he now says are of significance, but he should, frankly, be doing that for us. And simply to come to that at the end of the whole exercise of the case and find that these names are drawn out would not be very helpful.

JUDGE KWON: What would you mean by saying that to mark for identification? Until what? Until when?

MR. NICE: Well, certainly until we've got a translation but possibly also until I've asked questions about it, because I don't know ⁴⁴⁵⁹¹ what I'm going to say yet about this statement or its reliability. How can I?

JUDGE KWON: No further objection?

MR. NICE: No, but that objection is --

JUDGE KWON: Subject to your inquiry.

MR. NICE: Yes, of course.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: We'll mark it for identification, as was suggested. And if Mr. Milosevic could identify important names among this list.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm going to ask the witness, Mr. Janicevic, to look at tab 18.1, which contains the statement made by this KLA member who was brought in by the police and interviewed to indicate certain names that he considers to be important on this list, the persons who are mentioned as members of the KLA, that is.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One of the most important names is Camilj Iljazi, nicknamed Barli, who was commander of the 161st Brigade. After all, all of these names are important because all these people were members of a terrorist organisation that operated in the area, together with their commander.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Look at tab 18.2 now. This is an official note which does not come from the Ministry of the Interior. What is this? What does this pertain to? Please be so kind as to explain.

A. This note pertains to the area of the villages of Ivaja and Kotlina. I received information from the MUP staff of the Republic of ⁴⁴⁵⁹² Serbia that allegedly a massacre had been committed in the area against civilians. Since this was an area where the military was in charge, I asked the commander of the 243rd Brigade to inform me as to whether there was anything going on there that would be of security interest, and I also asked whether a massacre had been committed at all. My request was responded to by way of this note. I think there's a translation here. Yes, there is.

Q. What was it that you found out from this note that you received from Lieutenant Colonel Djurovic? I see that he signed it. Or rather, somebody else signed on his behalf. I can't read the signature, though.

A. I found out that in the area of Ivaja and Kotlina, there was a mop-up operation. The Siptar terrorist gangs were mopped up within a five-kilometre area. The 243rd Motorised Brigade took part in it, and also the PJP, the special purposes unit from Urosevac. And some members of the police station in Kacanik. The action was carried out according to a plan of the 243rd Brigade, or rather, the border battalion of that brigade. They informed me that they do not have any information about the loss of life of a large number of civilians in the area.

Q. You've explained just now that you were actually checking information that you received from the MUP staff.

A. Yes.

Q. And you sought an explanation from the military commander in charge of the area?

A. That's right.

Q. So the answer was negative? ⁴⁴⁵⁹³

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Janicevic.

JUDGE KWON: In the passage I note that there were three young women who were armed and partly dressed in uniforms. Did you know that at the time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I knew about it as soon as I received this official note. Three younger women who were armed and partly dressed in uniform.

JUDGE BONOMY: Would there be an on-site investigation of these events?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: What can you tell us about that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After every anti-terrorist action carried out by the MUP or the military in the area of the secretariat where I was head of secretariat, always - and I emphasise always - an on-site investigation was carried out. The investigating judge and the scene-of-crime officers always went there and documented it by photographs and video as well. Everything that happened.

JUDGE BONOMY: Did that happen in relation to the event of the 9th of April?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: So there must be a report of the on-site investigation.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There must be.

JUDGE BONOMY: So why did you have to ask the army? ⁴⁴⁵⁹⁴

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because in the reports that I received, there was no information like the kind the staff was seeking from me, so I wanted to double-check to see whether something had been omitted, whether there was any omission on the part of the persons who were there. The scene-of-crime officer who was there had not informed me that a large number of civilians had lost their lives, so I was wondering whether there had been an omission, whether something had been done in that way. I don't know whether I'm being clear.

JUDGE BONOMY: That is clear, but by the 8th of May, when this report was written, there had already been an investigation by your officers and an investigating judge had been to carry out an on-site investigation; have I got that correct?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The investigating judge went out the same day when the terrorist action was over. Our report to the MUP staff went on the same day when the action was completed, or rather, when I received the report of the on-site investigation from the scene-of-crime officers. This report probably went through some other channels, or rather, this report about the killing of a larger number of civilians probably went through the Verification Mission. So already on the next day, the 9th or the 10th, I cannot recall the exact date, I wrote to the commander of the 243rd Motorised Brigade, asking him whether he had any information to that effect. It was only on the 8th of May that I received a reply, a reply to my request.

JUDGE BONOMY: So it took him more than three weeks to reply to you? Rather unsatisfactory. Anyway, thank you. ⁴⁴⁵⁹⁵

JUDGE KWON: I note several statements taken by Mr. Jasovic are following this tab, so this -- so I take it that this official note was based upon those investigations by Jasovic. Is it right? From tab 18 --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know what number you're referring to exactly.

JUDGE KWON: From 18.3 until 18. -- I don't know how long it goes. A number of statements.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know which particular note you're referring to, I beg your pardon. The one that we've been dealing with until now?

JUDGE KWON: The official note, tab 18.2, was written on 8th of May, 1999. The following tab, which was not dealt with yet by the accused, is a statement taken by Mr. Jasovic on 1st of May. So when you referred to on-site investigation, do you mean this kind of investigation by Mr. Jasovic?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me just have a look at this. 18.2 has nothing to do with what Jasovic did.

JUDGE KWON: If you could take a look at 18.3.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see no similarity here, nor do I see any link between this note compiled by Lieutenant Colonel Djurovic and the one taken -- the statement taken by Jasovic.

JUDGE KWON: I'll leave it to the accused. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. KAY: Can 18.2 be an exhibit?

JUDGE KWON: Yes. ^{44596 BLANK PAGE 44597}

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. While we're still dealing with 18.2, what does 18.2 say towards the end of the second paragraph? It says that investigators from the MUP of Urosevac carried out the on-site investigation. That's what you said a few moments ago.

A. Yes.

Q. So on the basis of the on-site investigation and all the information you received, you did not know of the loss of lives of many civilians; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Then you say that from the MUP staff, you were asked to resolve the question whether this information about the killing of civilians was correct.

A. Yes, that's right. And since I could not deal with the issue through my own people, who were on the ground, because they told me that no civilians were practically killed, I sought additional information. I asked the military to tell me whether it was the situation or not.

Q. And the military told you that it was not correct?

A. Yes, it was, with a bit of a delay, but the military told me that what was contained in that other information was not correct.

Q. All right. The statement that we have in tab 18.3, taken by Jasovic, Sparavalo and Zoran Djordjevic -- Jasovic and Sparavalo we have encountered on several occasions, Jasovic testified here, but who is Djordjevic Zoran?

A. He was a member of the State Security Service of the Urosevac ⁴⁴⁵⁹⁸ department.

Q. So that is another example where they took the statements together. Now what does this statement refer to and is this an authentic document of your secretariat?

A. Yes, it is an authentic document and it relates to the identification of individuals who were members of the terrorist organisation of the KLA in the Kacanik area. The villages mentioned are Nika, Kovacevac. That's all I can see here.

Q. Did you have an opportunity of reading the statement at the time it was taken?

A. Quite certainly I did, but it's been six or seven years since then, so I can't remember all the details of it.

Q. All right. Fine.

JUDGE BONOMY: Do you know the circumstances in which the person came to give the statement?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It doesn't say here. It doesn't state the circumstances, but probably they were taken into custody by the police who were in the checkpoint at that time.

JUDGE BONOMY: And does it follow you won't know what happened to him afterwards?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After giving the statement, the person was probably allowed to go home.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: All you can say is that this is authentic document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. ⁴⁴⁵⁹⁹

JUDGE KWON: Did you bring this document with you when you came to The Hague?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: How did you get this document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I got the document from the forward command post of the Urosevac SUP in Leskovac -- relocated command post. And part of the documents were given me by the MUP, from the KiM document, Kosovo and Metohija document, the group determining responsibility and accountability of both Albanians and Serbs for the events in Kosovo. And they amass all the relevant information and evidence in order to process the matter further one day.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tab 18.4 is a very brief statement. Who is this third person that signed the statement?

A. Darko Amanovic, a member of the State Security Service.

Q. So this is a statement taken together by the public and State Security Services; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. What is this one about? What does it refer to?

A. It refers to persons who had collected money for the needs of the so-called KLA, for its functioning or for the procurement and purchase of the weapons, pursuant to an order by Rufki Suma from the village of Dimce.

Q. And then it says which KLA members he knows; is that right?

A. Yes. Rufki Suma was also the commander of the local staff for ⁴⁴⁶⁰⁰ Palivodenica.

Q. Is this again an authentic document by your secretariat?

A. Yes, it is an authentic document.

MR. KAY: Can tab 18.4 be made an exhibit?

JUDGE KWON: Any observation from Mr. Nice?

MR. NICE: Your Honour, in relation to all this material, I --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone.

MR. NICE: In relation to all this material, I've laid out principal objections earlier and the Chamber has made its ruling about in principle admissibility. I'm not going to repeat those. Where there are no translations, I obviously make the objection that I made earlier on this morning. And as to the documents that are admitted, should of course the Chamber find itself in a position following cross-examination to take the view that documents, once admitted, should be -- should not have been admitted, it's always in a position to change its mind.

So the best thing is that, save for those that aren't translated, if we just allow them in on the basis that the Chamber has been allowing them in.

JUDGE KWON: Of course the matter -- the weight is for the Chamber to decide later. We'll admit 18.3 and 18.4.

MR. KAY: Tab 17 is still an outstanding --

JUDGE KWON: 17 and 18.1 would be marked for identification. Can we deal with it? Let us move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁴⁶⁰¹

Q. Mr. Janicevic, in tab 18.5 we have a document which I'm also going to ask you about to ask you whether it is the authentic document of your secretariat and what it refers to.

A. Yes, this is an authentic by my secretariat and it relates to persons who collected -- or rather, persons who joined up with the KLA and who engaged in mobilisation, the mobilisation and recruitment of new members for that same organisation.

Q. The document in tab 18.6 is another short statement. Is that an authentic document of your secretariat as well?

MR. KAY: Can 18.5 be made an exhibit?

JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll deal with it after 18 is over, comprehensively. Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. In 18.6, the person giving the statement, and it was given on the 14th of April, 1999, he says that at the time there were over 500 KLA members in that particular village.

A. That's the information we had at the time, yes.

Q. Now we come to 18.7A. Is that once again a document of your secretariat?

A. Yes, that is another secretariat document.

Q. Do we have stipulated here members of the KLA in the Slatina and Ivaja area?

A. Yes. There were seven individuals here who were members of the terrorist KLA organisation in Krivaja.

Q. The next one is 18A. Is that an authentic document? ⁴⁴⁶⁰²

A. Yes, this is an authentic document.

Q. It relates to the Kacanik municipality?

A. Yes. And it is about an attack -- or describes an attack on members of the police station of Kacanik, or rather, the commander, and who might have been in the group -- the perpetrators of the group, and also it refers to the funeral of one of the attackers, Asim Hetem -- Asaj Hetem.

Q. It is a statement with respect to a terrorist operation and the perpetrators thereof; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And you arrived at that information by interviewing the person who gave this particular statement; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. It was within the frameworks of the investigation that was conducted with respect to the terrorist attack; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And that is also an official document of your secretariat; is that right?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Thank you. And now we can go on to tab 18.9, which is another statement which should come from your secretariat. The date is the 6th of April. Do you know about this statement?

A. Yes, I do. It is a document belonging to my secretariat, and it refers to members of the terrorist KLA organisation who, without uniforms -- were active without uniforms, bearing weapons, wearing civilian ⁴⁴⁶⁰³ clothes in the area.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Janicevic, this is described as a preliminary interview. What is that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] An informative interview. Perhaps the translation is wrong, because here it says -- it uses the usual term, "informativni razgovor," the customary term for "interview." So perhaps that's a matter of the way in which the document was translated.

JUDGE BONOMY: Can I ask the interpreter whether that one begins in exactly the same way as tab 18. The translation of tab 18 is: "On 13 April 1999 an interview was conducted ..." and this one starts --

JUDGE KWON: Could we put the 18.8 and 18.9 together, or the interpreter could note that.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter notes that the same term, "informativni razgovor," was used in both statements, which equals "interview."

JUDGE KWON: I thank the interpreters for their effort. That has been clarified. Thank you. Let's proceed.

Mr. Janicevic, when your inspectors take a witness statement from a witness, do they produce the statements in Cyrillic letters or in alphabet?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It depends on the typewriters they had. Some had Cyrillic-script typewriters, others had Latin-script typewriters. Jasovic mostly used the Latin script.

JUDGE KWON: So I don't think I saw witness Jasovic's statements written in Cyrillic letters. ⁴⁴⁶⁰⁴

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Jasovic's typewriter was a Latin-script typewriter.

JUDGE KWON: So that's why I'm asking. Let's go on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. 18.10 is the next one. What does that tell us? And I can see that it is a statement which was typed out in the Cyrillic script on the 26th of March, 1999. Is that an authentic document of your secretariat?

A. Yes, this is another authentic document by the Secretariat of the Interior of Urosevac. It talks about an interview with Ljaci Naser from the village of Pustenik in the Kacanik municipality. And he goes on to say in his statement that in the village of -- in Kacanik municipality, the 161st Brigade was formed, led by Camilj Iljazi, nicknamed Barli, and another person. And they say that in certain hamlets or villages in that municipality, a number of village staffs were established.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, how can you say this is an authentic document? I note Jasovic's and Sparavalo's signatures are missing here.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, since this has been photocopied a number of times, maybe you can't see the signatures, but the document is authentic 100 per cent. I'm quite sure of that.

JUDGE KWON: We can note the witness's signature, while we cannot see the signatures of the inspectors.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. They're not visible here. But probably it was signed. But as I say, because of the photocopying, you can't see the signatures. But the document is 100 per cent authentic, ⁴⁴⁶⁰⁵ because we see here members of the KLA, persons who were members of the KLA. For example, in line 6 or 7, his nickname was Era, and he is in prison at the moment in Pristina for having committed the crime of murder, and the International Court in Pristina, in March this year, tried the case, and many others too from the Kacanik area.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Let's go on, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is it of any importance, this fact that Mr. Kwon pointed out to us, that is to say that, for the most part, or most of the statements so far taken by Jasovic were typed out in the Latin script, whereas this one was typed out in the Cyrillic script. Is that of any importance?

A. No, not really, because our service used both official scripts. The Cyrillic and Latin were both official scripts, so it depended on the typewriter that people had. And Jasovic probably was in the Kacanik area when taking this statement and this kind of typewriter happened to be there, so he had to type the statement out on that particular typewriter.

Q. All right. Fine. Now, what about the statement in tab 18.11? Is that an original document of your Secretariat of the Interior, and what does that one refer to?

A. This is another authentic document of the Secretariat of the Interior of Urosevac, signed by Jasovic and Sparavalo, and it is about the fact that the villagers of the village of Ivaja left their houses. And a local, Halati [phoen], took to the forest. And it mentions an individual whom he met in the forest with an automatic rifle, and that members of the MUP carried such rifles, which meant that Alji Ljuta had seized the rifle ⁴⁴⁶⁰⁶ from one of the MUP members who had probably been killed in the fighting against the terrorists.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Janicevic. Now we move on to tab 18.12, where we have another statement. Is that also an authentic document of your secretariat?

A. Yes, this is an authentic document of the Urosevac SUP. The statement was taken by Jasovic and Sparavalo, and it is about Rafiz -- yes. Members of the KLA. Azem Elezi, who mobilised some members of the KLA. Sometimes that mobilisation was done forcibly, with threats issued, under duress.

Q. And this person giving the statement was said to be -- was accused of being a Serb spy; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

JUDGE BONOMY: Do you know how this person came to be in the police office?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He probably came on his own, of his own accord, from what I can read in his statement.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Under tab 18.13, we see a statement related to the murder of the commander of the police station of Kacanik, who was killed at the entrance to the Gajre village, Kacanik municipality. Is this an authentic statement and a document of your secretariat, dated the 20th March, 1999?

A. Yes, it is an authentic statement from the SUP of Urosevac. This one was also taken by Jasovic and Sparavalo. It was given by Izahir ^{44607 BLANK PAGE 44608} Mulaki. He describes the way in which this murder was planned. They called the commander on his cellphone and told him that Riza Kiki, a person from the local security, had been kidnapped. The commander did not suspect anything. He went out to check this information, he was ambushed on the road and three members of the police who accompanied him were also killed.

Q. Was this the gravest incident just before the NATO aggression in your area?

A. Yes, it was the most serious one, not only in my area, but in the area of Kacanik until then.

JUDGE BONOMY: Do you know, Mr. Janicevic, what proportion of these various people giving statements could speak Serb, the Serb language?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 99 per cent of them. 99 per cent of all persons who have given these statements speak Serbian. Over 80 per cent of the overall ethnic Albanian population in the Urosevac area speaks Serbian.

JUDGE BONOMY: And in what language would most of them actually give the statement?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those who did not understand Serbian would give their statements in Albanian. Those who understood Serbian would give their statements in Serbian, on a case-to-case basis, whatever the interviewee asked for.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, if you could tell us where this ⁴⁴⁶⁰⁹ evidence leads us. Suppose that they all -- the content of all these documents, statements, are true. What does it prove? Does it have any bearing in relation to the specific event referred to in the indictment or as in Racak case? These names appear in the Schedule L of the Kosovo indictment?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, Kacanik is part of what you call the indictment, and this attests to the fact that -- sorry. The indictment alleges that a certain number of civilians were killed by the state security forces, whereas these documents speak about great presence of the KLA in that area and very intensive terrorist activities, including murders and attacks on policemen, soldiers, civilians. This absolutely refutes all the claims about the terrorising of civilians in the area of Kacanik municipality, as you have already seen. The witness we have before us, former chief of Urosevac SUP, verified the information that he would receive from outside. He did not rely on each piece of information he would receive. He would sometimes seek additional confirmation even from military authorities.

JUDGE KWON: My question was specifically whether any of these alleged KLA members appear as victims in the indictment. Schedule L deals with the victims in relation to Kacanik municipality. So you're not alluding to that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I did not compare that schedule with all these statements, because my time is very limited, but I will do so. In fact, I will ask one of my associates to cross-check to see if any of the persons mentioned in the statements are on the list. My point is, and ⁴⁴⁶¹⁰ my assertion is, that neither the police nor the army committed any crimes, in that municipality or in any other.

JUDGE KWON: Then we can deal with these documents much faster. Let's go on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But I would like to draw your attention to the claims made by a number of witnesses who testified here, very authentically, who spoke about the number of Albanians killed in this period by the KLA. That is an aspect that is given short shrift here from the word go. More of them were killed from June 1999 onwards than in the preceding period, many more, in the period when there were no police or army left.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, what do we see under tab 18.14? I see it's an official note, but I won't go on, in order to avoid leading you.

A. This is an official note drawn up by authorised officer Boban Krstic. It mentions persons who are members of the KLA who were active in Bob and Ivaja villages. Reference is made to their names. Rahim Elezi, Adami Zekerija, the son of a certain Imer Gasi, et cetera. This is also an authentic document of the secretariat in Urosevac.

Q. Thank you. What is the official note under 18.15 about? Is it an authentic document of your secretariat? In fact, it says here "Republic of Serbia, Ministry of the Interior, Secretariat in Urosevac, Kacanik Police Station."

A. This official note was submitted by the deputy commander of the Kacanik Police Station, to the effect that a certain Sulejman Loki from ⁴⁴⁶¹¹ Kotlina village came of his own accord to this police station, and he stated that a group of four armed men in camouflage uniforms and hoods on their heads, with KLA insignia, came and took his hunting rifle. That means that in the period before the war, the terrorists used to disarm all the people, Albanian people, who possessed weapons legally. We had hundreds of such cases.

Q. This is also authentic as a document?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you say the same about tab 18.16? I mean about authenticity.

A. Yes.

Q. The authorised officers are different in this statement.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... questions and answers, leading or otherwise, about authentic. It may be that we should know what is being meant by "authentic." Does it mean that the witness produced them himself or is positively affirming that they are documents which come from a certain source, or does it mean something else? I'm not sure what it means. I'm not particularly being difficult, I just want to know what is being meant.

JUDGE KWON: I take it that the witness brought with him these documents. Am I right in so understanding?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

JUDGE KWON: And it was in the official archive in Urosevac police -- SUP Urosevac?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it was in the official archive of Urosevac SUP and the area of the police station itself. ⁴⁴⁶¹²

JUDGE KWON: You saw these documents contemporaneously at that time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, in 1998 and 1999.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: Let's go on, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Kwon just raised an issue concerning these documents that you brought and that are being kept in the archives. Were all the documents preserved or were a part of them destroyed, lost?

A. Only a small portion of all the documents were preserved. The greatest part of them were destroyed or they were left behind in the area, in the localities of the particular police stations or the Urosevac SUP. After the withdrawal of the police, following the agreement, our police force handed over their building to KFOR, and we don't know what happened to the documentation that was left behind. Some documents were destroyed in April 1999, when the SUP building was bombed. The entire building burnt down.

Q. When the MUP building in the centre of Pristina was destroyed by the bomb, were other buildings around it also damaged or destroyed?

A. Many other buildings were destroyed. The municipality building, part of the provincial Assembly building was destroyed, a great number of enterprises and factories, the Orthodox Christian cemetery, et cetera.

Q. Did you also mention the post office?

A. The post office building was among the first to be bombed in the area. ⁴⁴⁶¹³

Q. I know you said that, but it's missing from the transcript. I think you should speak more distinctly, and speak up, generally. If the interpreters don't hear you, it won't be on the record.

A. I don't want to speak too loud, not to offend the Judges.

Q. I heard you.

JUDGE KWON: If it's a convenient time. I note the time. We'll adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.43 p.m.

JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, in document 18.6, there is an official note. What does it refer to? Is it another document of your secretariat? What is it about? What are the events concerned? Let me draw your attention to the effect that there is a link between 18.16 and 18.17.

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: It seems to be 18.16. There is no microphone for the witness.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The official note was drawn up on the premises of SUP Urosevac regarding the kidnapping of Agim Idrizi from Laniste village, Kacanik municipality. That person was kidnapped by six members of the terrorist KLA who came to his house by night, dragged him out of his bed, handcuffed him, and took him away, telling his mother that they were taking him to fight against the Serbs.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. When did this happen? ⁴⁴⁶¹⁴

A. On the 5th of March, I believe. Yes. On the 5th of March, at 9.00 p.m., in the area of Kacanik.

Q. In this official note in 18.16, it says the person is still suffering from depression, is unable to remember everyone he had seen, and then there is an additional statement, a supplementary statement, under 18.17.

A. After the kidnapping, that person was taken to the KLA prison in Ivaja village that was attached to the headquarters of the 161st Brigade. After the anti-terrorist operation of the 8th of March, 1999, some of the persons who had been kidnapped were freed. However, this person, together with some others, were taken, transferred to an auxiliary prison. They were taken from village to village, ending up in Raka. And then a vehicle came to pick them up from Raka and take them to the central KLA prison in Lapusnik. I'm not reading from this, I am recollecting that on the road to Llapusnik, he and four other persons, somewhere around Kosin village, because that's the only place where there is a crossing over the river, he fell out from that jeep, together with another person, Nezir -- I can't remember exactly.

JUDGE BONOMY: Is there a particular relevance to all this, Mr. Milosevic? It just seems to me to be wasting time.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let us establish just one more thing, Mr. Bonomy. It is relevant that the KLA terrorised Albanians at the time, very intensively so.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Look at page 2, towards the bottom. It says: "On the same night, ⁴⁴⁶¹⁵ half an hour later, they took us to Bicevac village, where I saw 50 members of the KLA and recognised Dzevat Belja carrying a weapon and a certain Hajrulah, nicknamed Butcher." Then these people were taken to the headquarters. All this happened in mid-March 1999. Then he speaks about the torture they were subjected to. On the next page, he says -- they ask him whether he was from the State Security Service. "I answered that I sold firewood. And after that, he put a hook through my nostril and started beating me. And then again caught me with a hook on my lower lip."

There is reference to all sorts of terror imposed on Albanians in the area from which this witness comes from.

Let us not waste any more time. What do we see under tab 18.18? Reference is made to some important person, a commander or something.

A. It is about Rufki Suma, who was the self-styled commander of the KLA staff for the territory of Pustenik, that is, the local community of Djeneral Jankovic, Kacanik municipality.

Q. Did you know anything about that KLA commander?

A. Rufki Suma was the commander of the KLA staff for Pustenik village. Yes, yes. We had prior information about him, that he was engaged in hostile -- organised hostile activities and had made public appearances. In 1998, when the State Security Service identified the first illegal staff of the KLA for Kacanik, Rufki Suma was in the group that was arrested, but under circumstances that had not been clarified until the end, he managed to escape. Eventually, criminal proceedings were instigated against him. ⁴⁴⁶¹⁶

Q. Under 18.19, do we see another statement? Is it authentic? It was given by Baskim Celaki.

A. Yes, it is an authentic document. Baskim Celaki was a member -- in fact, he was suspected to be a KLA member, but it was never proved.

Q. All right. In 18.20, we see another reference to Rufki Suma. It says: "This staff was formed by Rufki Suma, from Dimce village, Kacanik municipality."

A. Yes. I've already mentioned this.

Q. To what extent was the KLA present in Kacanik municipality?

A. Almost until the end of 1998. The KLA was present in Kacanik municipality without being active, without taking any actions against the army, the police, or civilians. The intensity of their activity started to grow in the beginning of January. That happened with the first kidnappings of Albanians who did not support KLA policies and did not support their cause.

Q. Very well. What about these documents in 18.21, 22, and 23? These are statements by Busi Refik, Brava Sehat and Busi Zajedin. They all date back to March 1999 and relate to KLA activities. Are they among the authentic documents from your secretariat?

A. They are all original and authentic documents of Urosevac SUP.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender these collectively, Mr. Kwon. You said you would deal with that after we finish with tab 18. It is my request that these documents be exhibited.

JUDGE KWON: All tabs will be admitted except for tab 18.13 and 18.19, which were not translated, and will be marked for identification, ⁴⁴⁶¹⁷ pending translation. And I note tab 17 was translated and handed over to the Chamber, so that can be admitted as well.

[Trial Chamber confers]

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, as briefly as possible, what do you know about 163rd Brigade? You mentioned 161st and 162nd, with an emphasis on the 161st. What do you know about 163rd?

A. That brigade of the KLA was formed only on paper. A commander was appointed. That was Ahmed Kaciko [phoen], who got killed in fights with the state security forces -- security forces, rather. And for a long time after that, until just before the war, they did not have the commander, and then they got a commander who used to be a deputy commander of the police station in Strpce.

Q. When did the first serious attacks on the area -- in the area of Urosevac SUP happen?

A. In 1987 [as interpreted], in November, when David Dugoli was killed, or rather --

Q. Who?

A. Dalip Dugoli, an Albanian.

Q. What was the background of his liquidation?

A. The background was that he did not want to join this terrorist organisation, he did not pay the so-called tax to them. He was an active socio-political worker, or official, and he used to say that the terrorists, those people who went to the woods, are the worst kind of ^{44618 BLANK PAGE 44619} criminals. And he said that in every gathering with his friends, and even before his enemies.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, are we hearing the events in 1987? Can we move on to 1999?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I didn't ask a question linked to 1987. I asked when the first more serious terrorist attacks took place in the Urosevac SUP area, and the witness's answer was that was the killing of the Albanian at the end of 1997. Now, whether that was intensified in 1998 and 1999 --

JUDGE BONOMY: There's a mistake in the transcript. There's a mistake in the transcript that's causing the problem.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And what happened, then, in 1998 and 1999?

A. In 1998, the attacks became more intense and there were preparations for more serious terrorist attacks at the beginning of January, when an explosive was used to attack a house in which a member of the State Security Service, Rajko Dodik [phoen], was living, belonging to the Urosevac SUP. He was a lodger there. That was in January. Then in April, another explosive device was launched against another policeman, traffic policeman, Miljam Veljkovic [phoen] his name was, and the attack became intensified on the road running from Stimlje to Suva Reka, in the Fermilje [phoen] gorge, in mid-1998. And from that time, in fact, the terrorist acts and provocation in the area became constant.

Q. Now, what do the documents in tabs 19 and 20 relate to? Perhaps we can take a look at them together. They date to the second half of ⁴⁴⁶²⁰ 1998, as far as I can see, the statements.

A. These are the minutes or records taken from individuals who were interviewed by the State Security Service for having prepared terrorist attacks, and they are individuals who organised the first terrorist staff in the Urosevac area.

Q. Both these two statements, the one in tab 20 and the one in tab 19, do they both relate to the same activity, to the same action?

A. Yes. Both relate to the same thing.

Q. Of course, the people giving the statement are different. Different people gave the statement.

A. Yes, that's right. But otherwise, the event was the same, the subject matter was the same.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, a new problem with these statements, I suppose, these documents, at any event. Before I come to that point, I ought to just make one point that I've been meaning to make earlier. I haven't taken objection to the, in principle, to the production of the earlier documents coming from Jasovic and Sparavalo because they were admitted not only through Jasovic but also at the hands of one or two other witnesses. But of course, it is, on topics of weight, a matter of concern that these weren't dealt with when Jasovic was here himself. I just put that on the record.

So far as 19 and 20 are concerned, 19 has not only the problem of being untranslated but of being significantly, I think, illegible. One does one's best. I think it's going to be tricky to read that text, and I don't know what the translators will make of it. From my point of view, ⁴⁴⁶²¹ it's also unfortunate that the names of the officials taking the statement are not at present identified, or maybe they are, but I'd be very much assisted by knowing who it was who did take them, because at the moment the names are, I think, illegible.

JUDGE KWON: Let us ask the witness whether he can identify the authorised official who took these statements, both of them, 19 and tab 20 as well.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In tab 19, one of the signatories was the official Srdjan Rosic, authorised official, the second one. I can't make out the first.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And who is Srdjan Rosic?

A. Srdjan Rosic at that time was the operative worker of the state security department of Urosevac.

Q. Is that a document of your secretariat?

A. No. This is the State Security Service document which was sent to us to keep us informed.

Q. Yes, but in your area?

A. Yes, Urosevac.

Q. All right. And what about tab 20? Tab 20 I can see has been translated. Tab 20. Let's just have a look. I think that the signatory was Dragan Djordjevic. Once again, a worker of the State Security Service department.

JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Milosevic. Judge Bonomy has a question. ⁴⁴⁶²²

JUDGE BONOMY: What action was taken against these people once they had confessed?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Since they confessed, a criminal report was raised against them and there were orders to arrest them from the investigating judge.

JUDGE BONOMY: Then what would happen to them?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then they would go to prison.

JUDGE BONOMY: But do you not know what actually happened? Was there a trial?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know that. By handing him over to the investigating judge, along with the papers, that's where the Ministry of the Interior's work ceases. We handed everything over. If the person was sentenced, then we would receive a judgement with the sentence back to us and it would be recorded in the SUP archives.

JUDGE BONOMY: And after June 1999, were you in a position to receive such reports back?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After June 1999, for Kosovo and Metohija, there were no court cases at all, as far as I know, so we did not receive any reports of that kind back. All the cases that were tried in Kosovo and Metohija in the courts there remained in the courts, and the cases that were with the prosecutor remained there, the pending cases in the secretariats remained in the secretariats of the interior, the analysis department, and it was the position that no documents should be taken away and out of the buildings in which the work was done.

JUDGE BONOMY: When was it you had to move from your office in ⁴⁴⁶²³ Urosevac?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 17th of April I moved to Pristina. The paper was dated the 15th, but I handed over my duties and left Pristina on that date. I didn't have an office there because the SUP building was bombed and completely destroyed.

JUDGE BONOMY: And does that mean that, by that time, no report had come back of any action taken in court against either of these two persons who gave the statements?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, while a court case is pending, it is not -- they're not duty-bound to inform the Ministry of the Interior what is happening to the accused and whether they did stand accused. I repeat: It was our task and job to see that persons who were dealt with by the crime technicians and criminal reports filed and arrested, and then all the papers were given -- handed up to the investigating judge, who then decided whether the individuals were arrested and remanded in custody. There would be a deadline 30 days, 60 days, depending on the crime committed.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. It would be very helpful to me to have this sort of thing followed through so that I get a complete picture of what actually happened to people who made such confessions of involvement with the KLA.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, I take it that all you know in relation to this document is that this statement was sent to you from state security, so you do not know the situation how this witness was taken to the custody of state security and what happened to this witness ⁴⁴⁶²⁴ later on.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know what happened because there was a uniform system for the criminal reports filed and written out in the secretariats and then sent to the investigating judges, courts, and prosecutors. They go via the public security system, which is a joint service, a communal service.

JUDGE KWON: That is just speculation as well. But did you bring these documents with you in person as well?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.

JUDGE KWON: So that is a copy which is sent from the state security at the time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you said a moment ago that the criminal report itself is filed by the Secretariat of the Interior.

A. Yes.

Q. Which is your organ; right?

A. The Secretariat of the Interior sends on the criminal report to the competent investigating judge of the prosecuting office.

Q. So that document, formally speaking and officially speaking, must pass through your organs?

A. Yes, it must pass through my organs.

Q. Thank you. This related to the intensification of terrorist attacks in 1998. Tell us, please: Terrorist attacks of this kind, did ⁴⁴⁶²⁵ they continue in 1998?

A. Yes, they did. In the second half of 1998, there was not a day that went by without terrorist action and provocation, especially in the Stimlje area.

Q. And what was the situation like -- what was the situation like after the establishment of the Verification Mission, at the end of 1998?

A. In the middle of 1998, a number of anti-terrorist actions were launched in which the combat capabilities of the KLA were eliminated throughout Kosovo mostly. Those forces were routed. Some of them were dispelled, dispersed, some were arrested. What remained took to the hills and mountains, and I'm talking about the area covered by my secretariat there. They went to villages which were almost inaccessible, such as Devetak, Topilo, and the upper part of the village of Jezerce. After the establishment of the Verification Mission, and when it started working, that is to say, sometime up until the end of October 1998, there was a repeated takeover of positions where the terrorists had been previously, up until the end of the anti-terrorist operations. Those positions were taken up again, as were the positions held by the army of Yugoslavia and the police up until then. Because, pursuant to no agreement with the OSCE, we had to withdraw and to retain only a portion of those defence positions in the area. For example, for the area of Stimlje, Crnoljevska gorge, there were six observation posts and nothing more, except for the regular police stations, for instance. That's as far as the police is concerned. The army had one Combat Group on Canovica hill, right near Stimlje, and two separate combat groups with just a few ⁴⁴⁶²⁶ soldiers manning them, and they were protection for the unit and protection for the settlement of Stimlje itself. One -- on a curve between Belinac and Racak on the road there, that was one, and another Kostanje hill behind Stimlje.

Q. You said that when the verifiers arrived, the Verification Mission arrived, the attacks became intensified. What were the targets of those attacks in particular?

A. The attacks were targeted at the police forces, the army, citizens, Serbs, Albanians who were not -- or did not want to collaborate with the terrorist organisation and did not wish to offer their assistance. The attacks were also geared against the lines of communication, the roads running to Prizren, or rather, the road from Stimlje to Suva Reka, for instance. So those attacks were such that it was a hit-and-run job from an ambush. They would shoot, kill, and flee from an ambush.

After mid-1998, up until the 10th of January, 1999, in that same area, that is to say, the Stimlje area alone, 25 soldiers and civilians were killed; and seriously wounded, 25 soldiers and policemen, or rather, soldiers, policemen, and civilians, which makes a total of about 50 casualties.

Q. Take a look at tab 21 now, please, which is a dispatch. It has its number. Just tell us the date of it and what it says in the upper left-hand corner.

A. The dispatch or telegram is dated the 28th of February, 1998 [as interpreted]. It is sent by the SUP of Urosevac. I signed it, as head of ⁴⁴⁶²⁷ the secretariat. And I'm informing the MUP of the Republic of Serbia and the staff of the MUP in Pristina that on the 22nd of February, 1999, there was an attack on a patrol which was checking out a piece of information whereby a person was reported kidnapped. And during that attack, the commander of the police station was killed, Captain Bogoljub Staletovic was his name, and some people were wounded: Jankovic Slobodan, Milosavljevic Djordje, and Sladjan Jovanovic. They were wounded on the occasion. In a later attack, in order to pull out the killed commander, Radi and Djuric Zoran, from another part of the unit, was wounded.

Q. Where did this actually happen, did you say?

JUDGE KWON: Just for the record, the transcript refers to this document as dated 28th of February, 1998. But instead it should be 1999.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1999, yes.

JUDGE KWON: Please answer the question.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This occurred at the entrance to the village of Gajavica, which is five or six kilometres away from Kacanik, along a stream. On the road, across the stream.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Which of these formations in response to the previous questions were in the area? You mentioned it was the 102nd --

A. 162nd Brigade of the KLA.

Q. They were members, those members contained in these documents that we went through in tab 18; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. So this is your dispatch, the MUP dispatch. Now take a look at ⁴⁴⁶²⁸ tab 22, please. This is also one of your documents, is it not?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Is that your signature?

A. Yes, it is. My document and my signature.

Q. And to whom is the document addressed? They're all abbreviations, so what are they?

A. The Ministry of the Interior headquarters, the department of administration for the police operative centre, the staff of MUP for Kosovo and Metohija in Pristina. And with this document, I inform the superior command that all measures have been taken to seek out the perpetrators of a terrorist attack on a group of policemen which had gone out to check out the accuracy of the information where Captain Bogoljub was killed and all the measures that were taken, and in which direction that terrorist group had pulled out. I should just like to mention that one of the terrorists in the clash itself, that is to say, the clash with the commander of the police station who was killed on the occasion, was also killed.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Janicevic. Now take a look at tab 23A. I have 23A first, followed by 23. I don't know whether that is the case in the rest of the binder as well.

A. Yes.

Q. So 23A is first. And as far as I can see -- yes, indeed, 23A is the English translation and 23 is the document itself. And I can see your signature there too. Is that indeed your signature?

A. On tab 23? ^{44629 BLANK PAGE 44630}

Q. Yes, that's right.

A. Yes, that is my signature on tab 23, and it describes the event itself. The dispatch is sent to the administration, the crime police, police administration, the operation centre, and the staff MUP of Pristina. And it describes what I talked about earlier on; the day, month, and time of the event, what actually occurred, when they opened fire on the patrol and why the patrol had gone to the village in the first place. Gajre is the name of the village, and which the casualties were, who was wounded.

Q. And what is in the document that is numbered tab 24? To whom is that addressed? Those same addressees, is it? And who sent this document?

A. This document was sent to the same addressees on the 8th of March, or rather, the 9th of March, 1999. And it is a dispatch informing the authorities, the crime police administration, the MUP staff for the province, about the results of the investigation and search for the terrorists. And it was signed by the head of the department instead of me. The head of the crime prevention department, Debeljkovic Branislav. It says, "By authority -- by authorisation." Yes, that's right, because I was away.

Q. So you say that on the 8th of March --

A. Yes: "8th of March at 0530 hours, members of the Urosevac SUP and Gnjilane SUP, together with members of the Yugoslav army, launched an operation to clear the villages of Straza, Ivaja, Gajre and Kotlina, Kacanik municipality, of the terrorist gangs which have carried out ⁴⁴⁶³¹ terrorist operations in this area with attacks on members -- terrorist operations in this area with attacks on members of the police and VJ and the kidnapping of rural citizens from the Siptar ethnic minority. "During the course of the operation, members of the Urosevac and Gnjilane SUP PJPs encountered strong armed resistance from the terrorist gangs in the sectors of all the villages listed above, and two members of the police were injured, as we informed you in our dispatch number 1510 of the 8th of March, 1999. Three members of the VJ were also injured when their reconnaissance vehicle drove over an anti-tank mine in Dasevcova Mahala in Kotlina village sector. The army and police suffered no casualties."

Q. In the village of Ivaja, what happened there? What do you say happened there?

A. "The members of the army smashed a large terrorist group and destroyed the staff of their so-called 162nd Brigade. In the process, a large amount of mines or MTS -" or materiel technical devices - "were seized."

Let me just mention that over 400 sleeping-bags were seized on the occasion, for example, from the warehouse belonging to the staff. And quite a lot of infantry weapons, hand-held rocket launchers, ammunitions, two all terrain vehicles, and other military equipment was captured. "A large amount of medical material was also seized, as well as documentation indicating the organisation of the terrorist groups and their operations. That was seized too. The operation to clear the terrorist groups in these villages was completed at 1730 hours on the 9th ⁴⁴⁶³² of March, 1999, when the PJP members returned to base. "Over the course of the operation, about 150 people were brought into custody. They were identified as people suspected of involvement in acts of terrorism. 22 people were detained for further processing and the rest were released. The results of the tests for the presence of gunpowder particles are expected."

Q. So that is your report. That is already March 1999?

A. Yes, the 9th of March.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, could this please be admitted into evidence?

JUDGE KWON: From 21 to 24 will be admitted. But 21 is not translated; we'll mark it for identification.

MR. KAY: Have we done 19 and 20?

JUDGE KWON: If we follow the Chamber's precedent in relation to Jasovic binder -- I'll have to consult with Judge Bonomy.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: We'll admit them as well, with 19 being marked for identification, pending translation.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I just say something else in relation to this report?

JUDGE KWON: Very briefly, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It says here that 22 persons were kept for further proceedings. They were found in the area of terrorist and anti-terrorist actions. They were interviewed and those are the statements that you are seeking in terms of how these persons came to give ⁴⁴⁶³³ the statements. These 22 persons were released, and three days later, the MUP of the Republic of Serbia sent us a report that the paraffin glove tests were positive, and we never looked for them again. That is what I wish to add.

JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, could you please look at document 25 now. This is a statement which was compiled where?

A. At the Kacanik MUP, or the police station of Kacanik, on the 12th of March, 1999.

Q. What does this statement pertain to? What does it indicate? Please tell us as briefly as possible.

A. This statement indicates events that occurred on the 28th of February, before the commander of the police station in Kacanik, Captain Staletovic, was killed.

Q. When did that happen?

A. On the 28th. So the person who was interviewed. Before the commander of the station managed to reach the stream where he was killed, and he wanted to check the information that Riza Kiki had been kidnapped, he came across a group of terrorists who were expecting the police to come because, before that, they telephoned the commander of the police station, stating that Riza Kiki had been kidnapped by terrorists. The person describes what he was told, to leave the vehicle, to flee, and so on, and everything else that happened.

Q. I'm sorry. Did you want to add something else? ⁴⁴⁶³⁴

A. Yes. Just go ahead, ask your question.

Q. Is there a reference here to 400 members of the KLA in the village of Ivaja?

A. Yes. Yes. We knew about them from earlier on. That's in the second part of the statement.

Q. That is also a document of your Secretariat of the Interior?

A. Yes. That is also a document of the Secretariat of the Interior. This was done in Kacanik, not at the Urosevac SUP, by Inspectors Jasovic and Sparavalo.

Q. Now let's move on to document number 26, please.

A. In this document, tab 26, it is important to say that in the area of Pustenik, municipality of Kacanik, there were about 200 persons who, on orders by a person who later became local commander, had to leave their homes and go into the woods in order to portray this as a humanitarian catastrophe to the international monitors. The rest doesn't really -- or rather, the terrorist group that was established in this village received weapons from the staff in Ivaja.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, do you recognise the authorised officials who took this statement?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot recognise the signatures, but I'm sure that they are employees of the State Security Service, as this was submitted to us. But that can easily be checked and verified.

JUDGE KWON: How? How can you verify that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A copy of this statement has to exist at the DB of Urosevac headquarters that is now in Leskovac. So it ⁴⁴⁶³⁵ will be very easy for us to check.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, will you allow the witness now, over the weekend, to check this with the headquarters of the Secretariat of the Interior, or rather, the organ in charge, so that he could give you this particular information, namely, the names of the authorised officials who took this statement and whose signatures are here on this sheet of paper.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: Very well. Let's do so. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. This statement contains rather important information. Could you please be so kind as to look at page number 2, Mr. Janicevic, where there is reference to the verifiers. Can you read that? Can you read what it says here? Could you start from the second paragraph from the bottom, but the middle. The sentence starts with: "The team of verifiers ..."

A. "The team of verifiers, in addition to Acif was joined by Ljaci, who, at the suggestion of the interpreter of the OSCE, forced the women and children to cry in order to pretend that the situation in the settlement was very difficult and that it constituted a humanitarian catastrophe. In addition to that, I personally saw in Kotlina, municipality of Kacanik, on one occasion, a group of verifiers of the OSCE who came in their own vehicles. According to what Acif said, the verifiers, in addition to different kinds of supplies, brought in camouflage weapons, as well as a certain number of -- a certain quantity ⁴⁴⁶³⁶ of medical equipment. In that way, we received --"

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please stop before the interpreter finishes translating the passage.

JUDGE KWON: The interpreters have difficulty following you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do I have to read it again?

JUDGE KWON: Would you start again after --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And a bit louder, please. Even I cannot hear you.

JUDGE KWON: After the medical equipment. "In that way ..." Start from there.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "In that way, as for our settlement -" he's referring to Kotlina, actually - "supplies were received, that is to say, food and medicine, and it was Saban Beca and Ajet Ljaci who brought in this food and this medicine on horseback. The village of Ivaja was the main centre for the distribution of food and other supplies received from international humanitarian organisations. According to the comments made by Acif Ljaci and other villagers from Mahala Ljac who visited the village of Ivaja every day, the -- Ivaja, municipality of Kacanik, I found out that on the 28th of February, 1999, in the mentioned village, the Main Staff of the KLA for the area of Kacanik was located in the mentioned village."

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Just a moment, please. I did not hear you read out the word "from," "From the 28th of February ..."

A. "From the 28th of February, the Main Staff of the KLA for the area ⁴⁴⁶³⁷ of Kacanik was located in that village. The staff was located in the house of Ibrahim Ljute, whose son, Redzep Ljute, was a member of the Socialist Party of Serbia in Kacanik and a member of the local security in the village. And he had previously been kidnapped by members of the KLA. The commander of the Main Staff is Camilj Iljazi and in the village of Ivaja at that time, there were about 300 members of the KLA. Their number was on the rise because, allegedly, new members of the KLA were coming in, persons who were temporarily employed abroad. So the number was supposed to go up by an additional 3.000."

"In addition to that, the hospital was in the house of --"

Q. I think that will do. Please just have a look at the one-but-last paragraph.

A. Let me finish.

Q. Where were the sub-staffs of the KLA established?

A. Let me just finish saying that the hospital was in the house of Ramusa Kodraljiu, whose son had also been kidnapped, and that was in the local staff of the KLA.

Now, we're looking at the one-but-last paragraph? I can also say that, in addition to the Main Staff in the village of Ivaja, members of the KLA established sub-staffs of the KLA in the villages of Gornja and Donja Kotlina, as well as Brav and Bus Mahala, that belonged to the village of Pustenik, municipality of Kacanik.

Q. And who was commander in Kotlina?

A. In the village of Gornja Kotlina, the commander was Seljman Kuci, father's name Mina, and the sub-staff is in the elementary school. The ⁴⁴⁶³⁸ commander of the sub-staff of the KLA of the village of Donja Kotlina is Miljaim Ljoku.

Q. All right. We've heard that name several times by now. There is additional information here that has to do with weapons that were brought in and also specific names of KLA members are referred to.

A. Yes.

Q. As well as the names of persons who were abducted in the area.

A. That's right.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Janicevic. Since Mr. Kwon allowed this, could you please check the names of the persons who took this statement. Because we have three illegible signatures here. So could you please do that?

A. Could I please just take the last page of this statement, Mr. President? Can I just take the last page where the signatures are?

Q. I think that should not be a problem.

A. [In English] Thank you.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, I see we may be reaching the time when the Court may decide to rise.

JUDGE KWON: We can sit a bit further than the usual time.

MR. NICE: Can I make my very small administrative point now, and it relates to this witness and also forthcoming witnesses. In reverse order, we have no notice of which witnesses are coming next after this witness. We've been preparing for one particular witness, of course, on and off now since the spring, Bulatovic, but I don't think he's coming. Maybe never, I'm not sure. But we would be assisted by knowing who is coming next. ⁴⁴⁶³⁹ As to this witness, the material he's producing has been available in part but entirely unsorted from before the summer break. And when it's unsorted, it's pretty well valueless. It needs to be in some form of order before we can work on it. In any event, we didn't have resources to work on it, frankly, from the time it arrived. So that it comes in now effectively fresh just right now. It constitutes some 90 tabs, many, if not most of which, are reports of one kind. We aren't in a position to obviously respond to them immediately. I hope very much that it won't be necessary to apply for any adjournment to deal with this evidence. And I'll do what I can. But there's a great deal of detail here, and if it's relevant, I'm going to have to do something to state a position on it. I mention all that so that the accused and those assisting him may have in mind the possibility that when this witness finishes his evidence, which I suppose in chief will be sometime next week, for one reason or another it might be necessary to have another witness available then. I'll obviously do everything I can to deal with him as soon as his evidence finishes.

JUDGE KWON: That's just notice.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Kay.

MR. KAY: Admissibility of tab 25 we need to resolve. Tab 26 is obviously pending.

JUDGE KWON: Those are not translated. Yes. So we'll mark them for identification. Thank you. The Chamber does not have the translations. ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁰ Mr. Milosevic, are you in the position to tell us who the next witnesses are after Mr. Janicevic? I think you are under an obligation, pursuant to our order, that you have to produce by the next week's statements -- schedule of next week's witnesses.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I assume that that obligation has been met, that the next witnesses are already on their way. Mr. Ognjanovic asked for them to be called. The next witnesses are Josan and Vukovic.

As for the list of witnesses -- or rather, before that, I would just like to make a remark, and then I will have to ask for closed session for 30 seconds only, in terms of the list of witnesses. Mr. Nice said that perhaps he will ask for a delay of the cross-examination of this witness. Please bear in mind that I never asked for the delay of any cross-examination, and my modest resources cannot even be compared to Mr. Nice's resources, as well as all the other services that are there to assist him. This is already become regular practice, that he asks for a delay between the examination-in-chief and the cross-examination. I don't think that that is customary, not even in your systems that you keep referring to time and again. And I think that it is Mr. Nice's duty to carry out the cross-examination. What would that be like if I asked for that kind of delay for each and every witness? And I would usually get a million pages to read overnight, and you never allowed me any delay, let alone in cross-examination. I believe that this is an approach of extreme discrimination. And now, in relation to what he said about the witness list -- ⁴⁴⁶⁴¹

JUDGE KWON: It is not a correct description when you said we never allowed a delay. The Chamber was minded to allow at any time any delay when requested.

JUDGE BONOMY: I would also like to know who are all the witnesses whose cross-examination by the Prosecution has been postponed. You say it's a regular practice. Apart from Jasovic, who else?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, look at Delic, for instance.

JUDGE BONOMY: Delic came back because you hadn't completed your re-examination. And the further work is --

THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Milosevic please speak into the microphone, thank you.

JUDGE BONOMY: The further delay is due to the way in which the material is produced. You should also bear in mind that all that has happened so far is Mr. Nice has given an indication of an application he might make, and if it's based on resources, the way in which he addressed it at the moment, he would certainly get no sympathy from me.

MR. NICE: I'm sorry about that. But just also to tidy something up. Delic's cross-examination was postponed at the order of the Court because of the protective measures issue. Nothing to do with the Prosecution.

And I hear what Your Honour says about resources. My decision has to be whether I take these documents seriously as a whole or individually and I'm in a position to respond to them. And resources to deal with 90 different detailed reports of police officers would strain any system.

JUDGE BONOMY: But your point was that you got them before the ⁴⁴⁶⁴² summer break, and really, we've -- you know, there is a time-scale here that has to be met, and that seems to me a not unrealistic notice to give you of these documents.

MR. NICE: I think I'd better make the point clear, because I think sometimes the Chamber is unaware of realities. First of all, we got some of them before the summer break. When they're disclosed by the accused they're delivered in a batch, untranslated, unsorted, and impossible to deal with, save by an enormous exercise of sifting first by Ms. Dicklich and her team. Their resources are not infinite. At the same time as that material was coming in, material was coming in for other witnesses. There is simply a limit to what is possible. And the Chamber can be quite sure that the available resources are fully deployed in working in what we hope is the best ordered way and the most rational way on the material as it comes in. And there are occasions when -- am I in a position to deal with 90 police reports in detail? I'm not.

JUDGE KWON: Let's deal with that when it arises.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, could I just remind you of one thing, you personally, because Mr. Bonomy was not present at the time, that while Mr. Nice's exhibits were being shown about Kosovo, 600.000 pages were given to me. And when I asked several times when I would be given time to read this, I would invariably receive an answer from Mr. May that you would look into the matter. As you know, I never got that time. And I think that it is wholly inappropriate for Mr. Nice to ask for some time and to have any kind of understanding for such requests on his part. And now in relation to what he had to say about the witness list, ⁴⁴⁶⁴³ could we just move into private session for 30 seconds, please?

JUDGE KWON: Yes. Private session.

[Private session]

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁴

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁵

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁶

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁷

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁸

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

[Open session]

JUDGE KWON: Yes.

MR. NICE: If the Chamber has not get shredded -- or had shredded, for want of space, its Jasovic files of one kind or another, it might be worth retaining them, because they may, of course, become valuable, or useful, in any event, as tools in the cross-examination of this witness. But I know there were a large number of files produced by both sides.

JUDGE KWON: And how long do you expect your cross-examination of Mr. Delic would last?

MR. NICE: Assuming on the basis -- not assuming. On the basis that I would be granted leave to cross-examine on three topics, I would have still hoped, subject to his response to my questions, to deal with it in one session. Because the Ashdown point, I think, I'm going to be in a position to put very succinctly, were I granted leave, assuming we're on the basis of -- we're allowed to proceed on the basis of parts only of the video, the whole video having been made available to the parties by then. ⁴⁴⁶⁴⁹ The other topics, I suspect, will be capable of being dealt with pretty swiftly. And it's certainly my intention to deal swiftly in the case of a witness who comes back for further cross-examination, even if the initial requirement that he come back for further cross-examination at a postponed date was not mine but a decision of the Court.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Nice. Mr. Janicevic, we'll adjourn for today and for the week, and we'll resume on Wednesday next week. But due to the circumstances of this case, we have to hear the evidence of Mr. Delic, with your evidence being interposed. So I think we may be able to begin your evidence again in the second session or in the third session. If you could make yourself available at that time, please. So at least at 10.30. We'll adjourn.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.02 p.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 28th day of

September 2005, at 9.00 a.m.