⁴⁴⁹⁸⁵

Monday, 3 October 2005

[Open session]

[The witness entered court]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9:03 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you are to continue with your examination-in-chief.

WITNESS: BOGOLJUB JANICEVIC [Resumed]

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

Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Janicevic.

A. Good morning, Mr. President.

Q. Tell us, please, where the headquarters of the 162nd Brigade was located, and we'd just moved on to that area of discussion towards the end of the working day on Friday.

A. To the autumn of 1998 the headquarters did not have a set location. It moved around. They changed the location very often. And from 1998 onwards, the headquarters was stationed in Ivaja, as of November 1998.

Q. The village of Ivaja?

A. Yes, the village of Ivaja.

Q. Thank you. Part of the diary of Hajrusha Kurtaj, is it contained in tab 79, something that is in fact linked up to their work and existence and things of that kind? Do you have the tab before you?

A. Let me just take a moment to find it, please. Did you say 79? ⁴⁴⁹⁸⁶

Q. Yes, yes.

A. Yes, it is the diary of Hajrusha Kurtaj, the deputy commander of the Kacanik group, of that terrorist organisation while it hadn't been proclaimed the 162nd Brigade. It was seized in August when there was an attempt to arrest him and another group of terrorists in his house in the village of Gabrica, and on that occasion during the clash another two persons were killed -- two persons were killed.

Q. Now, what do these documents contain? Let's go through them very quickly, Mr. Janicevic. Apart from this list of weapons, what photographs do we have here along -- attached to this diary?

A. They are photographs of the terrorists who were trained with the 12.7 millimetre machine-gun, and it was taken in the area of Kacanik - light machine-gun, in fact - in the spring of 1998.

Q. And what kind of insignia were there on the uniforms of the KLA?

A. The uniforms were black and the emblems were the emblems of the KLA, UCK. One of them is wearing a uniform, an olive green uniform with a helmet. And that can be placed on the overhead projector. You'll be able to see them with a 12.7 millimetre light machine-gun and the bullet belt, bandolier.

Q. Yes. These are all black and white photographs, and we're not going to waste time putting them on the overhead projector. We all have them here in the room.

A. In addition to the photographs and some other things here testifying to the personal relations between individual terrorists in the Kacanik group itself, we also have a list of weapons, who brought how many ⁴⁴⁹⁸⁷ weapons. This probably relates to the weapons they brought in from Albania. On the 13th of July, six automatic rifles, for example, 60 to 70 rounds of ammunition. Probably they were cases of ammunition, 60 to 70 cases of ammunition. Fifty caps, 50 vests, automatic rifles, 26 combat sets -- kits.

Q. Right. So you have the photographs, you have described Kacanik. How would you characterise the security situation and the activities of the terrorists in that area?

A. Kacanik, in -- or, rather, from November was an area where terrorist activity was expanding, and it intensified, terrorist attacks intensified in the area after mid-February 1999 when the first kidnappings started to occur.

Q. Thank you. Mr. Janicevic, tell us, how did you come by your information about the terrorist group that called itself the 162nd Brigade, about its headquarters, staff, the commander, and everything else?

A. Some of the information confirming our operative information and intelligence that we had earlier on, and they were amassed on the basis of friendly contacts and sources and talking to individuals who in one way or another came into contact with members of the service, and this is a diary which confirmed everything we had learnt and knew up until then.

Q. In the tabs, and I'm just going to remind you of those tabs, they were 18.1, 2, 3, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 27 inclusive, so within the frameworks of those tabs under tab 8 -- or, rather, 18, and the individual attachments I mentioned, do they contain information indicating the ⁴⁴⁹⁸⁸ actions of the 162nd Brigade as well?

A. Yes, they contain information from Official Notes which indicate the organisation and work of the 162nd KLA Brigade.

Q. According to your operative knowledge, what were the tasks of that brigade and its headquarters and staff and the entire composition of the brigade as a whole?

A. The tasks of the 162nd Brigade were organised into three stages.

Q. Yes, three stages, but tell us briefly what the first stage was.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly be asked to slow down and make pauses between question and answer. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic and Mr. Janicevic, the interpreters are asking you to slow down and to observe the pause between question and answer.

JUDGE KWON: And I think Mr. Janicevic should answer again. But before that, I didn't follow your evidence in relation to the provenance of these documents. Did you say that these photographs were seized together with this diary?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The photographs were taken along with the diary and a lot more documents which were -- which were seized and which related to the work of the terrorist group in our state. May I be allowed to answer the question that was asked me now?

JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So there were three stages. The ⁴⁴⁹⁸⁹ first stage was the collection of material and technical equipment to allow the organisation to function. The second stage were plans to secure the border crossings towards Macedonia, and securing the border crossing without any incidents for terrorists coming from outside and for mercenaries coming in from abroad. And the third stage was the -- were the terrorist attacks themselves, in fact, and terrorist provocations; kidnapping, abduction of citizens, the killing of Serb citizens and Albanians who did not agree with the policy being waged by the KLA. So that, then, started, to all intents and purposes, in the second half of February.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In tab 18 as a whole, do we have there numerous information bearing that out?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, with respect to what was going on in that part of your area relating to Kacanik, that particular locality, the Kacanik locality, did you analyse data and information about Serbs, Albanians, and other ethnic groups killed; soldiers, policemen, and so on and so forth?

A. We analysed the killings per communes, local communities.

Q. Yes. Looking at the municipalities, casualties with -- which ended in death and so on and so forth.

A. Yes.

Q. So we're not going to go back to that but that area of Kacanik was characterised how?

A. It was characterised by the fact that along the state border, 47 ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁰ kilometres of that state border, the configuration of the terrain is better than the one -- than the borderline towards Albania. It is an area where people live, as opposed to the other border belt, which is not populated and a difficult terrain, and you need much less time to cross the border illegally if you compare it to the Yugoslav-Albanian border where the terrain is difficult.

So these terrorists -- the terrorists bore that in mind when they stationed their 162nd Brigade in that particular area and when they gave it the assignment of not undertaking any terrorist activities but to lie low until almost mid-February 1999, to keep a low profile in order to cover up their activities and their presence and to be able, in a semi-legal fashion or illegal fashion, to bring in weapons and volunteers and mercenaries and so on and so forth.

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you said in explaining the tabs, tabs 51 to 59 inclusive, you said, among other things, that the same conduct was applied to who -- no matter who the casualties were; Albanians, Serbs, other ethnic groups, soldiers, policemen or whatever. Can you give us an example where the casualties were Albanians?

A. Yes, I can give you many examples. For example, in the Stimlje municipality and that general area, Nazmija Ljui [phoen] was killed in the area of Zborce, which is two to two and a half kilometres away from Stimlje in the forest, just for the mere fact that his brother, his brother was a reservist of the police station in Stimlje.

Q. In tab 80, do we see photographs from the on-site investigation pertaining to the killing of the Albanian? ⁴⁴⁹⁹¹

A. Yes. Those are the photographs of the late Nazmija Ljui.

Q. And what are the other photographs?

A. The other photographs are photographs from the on-site investigation conducted when his brother reported the killing. They are parts of the clothing, parts of the footwear, the cart, horse-drawn cart he was brought in, the boot, and he went to get some firewood for his family with this cart.

Q. So he was doing his -- going about his regular daily business. He was going to the woods to get some firewood for his family and was killed because his brother was a reservist; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Was an on-site investigation also conducted with respect to the killing of a number of Albanians that we mentioned earlier on whose names are found in tab 54?

A. Yes.

Q. This is also linked to Kacanik.

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. They're Mahmut Daliste and Camil Reka --

A. As far as Mahmut Daliste is concerned, no on-site investigation was conducted because we didn't know that he'd in fact been killed. The first information reached us that he had been kidnapped, that there had been a kidnapping. It was only later that we learnt that they were killed in a brutal manner and held previously for two days in a house in a street in Kacanik or, rather, in front of a house in Kacanik and that they would instil fear into the population and show the population. They left them ⁴⁴⁹⁹² there to see what fate would befall them if they ally themselves with the Serb authorities.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Janicevic. Now, under point 1, deportation, paragraph 63 of the indictment, under (j) in the Serbian version, it says: "In the period from the 24th of March to the 14th of April, forces of the FRY and Serbia shelled and attacked villages in the Urosevac municipality ..." And Urosevac is the central municipality bureau and secretariat; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now I go on: "... including the Biba, Prelez, Raka, and Staro Selo villages, killing a number of residents. After the shelling, forces of the FRY and Serbia entered some of the villages, including Papaz and Sojevo, and ordered the residents to leave. Other Kosovo Albanians from Varos Selo and Mirosavlje fled their villages as the Serb forces entered." And then it goes on to say that: "After the residents left their homes, the soldiers and policemen burned the houses. The displaced persons went to the town of Urosevac where most boarded trains which carried them to the Macedonian border crossing at Djeneral Jankovic." And then: "Serb forces directed the train passengers to walk ... to the border. Others travelled in convoys ... At the border, Serb forces confiscated all their documents."

JUDGE ROBINSON: What's the question, Mr. Milosevic?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. My question is as follows: The allegations here contained in this point of the indictment, and there are several allegations there, I assume ⁴⁴⁹⁹³ you were able to follow, are any of them correct?

A. I don't know how they could be correct when from the 24th of March, in all of these villages there were units of the army of Yugoslavia. How could they shell themselves? That is my first point. Secondly, Staro Selo or, rather, Sojevo in Kamena Glava, and partly Staro Selo, had tank units stationed in them. NATO Air Force bombed them every day. Three APCs were hit by NATO bombs and destroyed. Until the end of the war, the forces the army of Yugoslavia were in those villages, so I do not see how or why they could have shelled themselves.

Q. All right. You've given an answer as far as the shelling is concerned. Now, since this paragraph has to do with deportations, it says that the forces of the FRY and Serbia, as they're called here, expelled residents from villages and boarded them on trains, making them go to Macedonia.

A. That's not true. As soon as the bombing started, the population started moving out of the entire area of Urosevac, especially Kacanik, where they assumed that perhaps NATO ground forces would enter the territory of Serbia. I assert that the forces of the FRY and Serbia, as they're called there, did not expel the population. There are many examples that villages in that area remained intact, that not a single inhabitant left. Rahovica, Crnoljevo, for instance, Srpski Babus. Srpski Babus is 100 per cent an ethnically pure Serb village. Not even ten residents remained. After the war, the village was razed to the ground.

Q. Are you trying to say that the entire population of that Serb populated village left? ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁴

A. Yes. Not more than ten villagers stayed. There are about 50 houses there and no one was there.

Q. Those were Serb houses?

A. Yes, those were Serb houses. About 150 Albanian houses and 50 Serb houses.

Q. So as for paragraph 63, what I quoted, you can testify to the fact that none of this is correct?

A. Absolutely none of it is correct.

Q. All right. On several occasions in the territory of your SUP, as we saw a few moments ago, you had the opportunity of seizing documentation of terrorist groups and their staffs, no matter what they called themselves; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct. After every anti-terrorist action, for the most part, in their staffs and substaffs we seized documentation.

Q. Can we have a look at what is contained in tab 81. Is that some kind of information coming from the Jezerce KLA staff, and what does it say?

A. Yes. This is notification provided by Ljuftari, a solder. He is informing his staff that the inhabitants of Burnik were currently in the force because of the fighting going on in Grebnik. Grebnik is ten kilometres away from Burnik. Again, he says the Rajamine-Kacanik corridor has been cut off. This is an illegal route that the terrorists use for the transportation of firearms and other weapons.

Q. All right. Why did the population leave their villages? Why were they leaving, according to this document? ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁵

A. According to this document, they were leaving out of fear of possible clashes between the military and police and terrorist groups in the area.

JUDGE BONOMY: What is this document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a notification. Notification. The original is in Albanian, it is handwritten, and a soldier who was reconnoitering informed his unit that he came across a group of inhabitants from a village. All the inhabitants of the village of Burnik, as a matter of fact, from the territory of Urosevac, and they were staying in the forest out of fear. He talked to them, and they were afraid because of the fighting going on in Grebnik, a village about ten kilometres away from Burnik.

JUDGE BONOMY: There are actually two informants referred to in the document, are there not?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The second part, for Rajamine. I'm talking about Burnik now, Burnik. But the corridor had been cut off. The corridor is a road that they used and they thought was safe for transporting terrorists, materiel, and weapons between their different operative zones, and the staffs and substaffs of the terrorist units in that area. That road was cut off, Rajamine-Kacanik. The army took the area at the time, and they could not use it. So the soldier informing his unit received this information from Skender Mustafa, and the information that in the village of Plesina there were wounded soldiers. That is the territory of the municipality of Urosevac too.

JUDGE BONOMY: Where does the document come from? ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁶

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document was seized after an anti-terrorist action of the KLA staff in Jezerce. According to the procedure that was then in place, every such document was sent on to the state security service along with an accompanying letter, and then they processed it further and made their own analyses. 90 per cent of the documents found in the staffs were handwritten.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, please continue.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell me, this refers to deportations, and you said that Albanians were fleeing --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a moment, Mr. Milosevic.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. To the best of your knowledge, the police that you commanded in the area of the SUP of Urosevac, how did the police behave to people who were leaving their homes?

A. For the first few days the traffic police returned these columns moving towards the border. They were sent back home. However, they tried to reach the border in any possible way. If they had set out for Djeneral Jankovic and were returned, then they would move to Globocica. That is another border post facing Macedonia. If they were returned from there, they went towards Prizren via Strpce. That was done for a few times on orders from the staff so that people would not be mistreated in any way or endangered. They could have lost their lives due to the bombing. After ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁷ all, a similar thing happened during the bombing in Djakovica when a refugee column was bombed. So we stopped returning them eventually.

Q. You allowed them?

A. Yes. We could not restrict their freedom of movement. That was it. And along the road we helped them in every conceivable way; we gave them humanitarian assistance, food aid, et cetera.

Q. Tell me now, were there any abuses vis-a-vis the displaced population that something unlawful or impermissible was done?

A. Well, of course there were individual incidents. There were cases of robbery as well. Let me give an example. We found out through operative channels that a group of reservists of the army of Yugoslavia at the border near Globocica stopped the displaced persons who were moving along and took away their money. That group was brought into custody, they were interrogated, and handed over to the military organs. They were immediately detained. These are four persons who were immediately brought into custody and handed over to the military court. We also had some cases when individual Serbs were taking buses from socially owned companies and asking individuals, civilians, for money in order to be transported. They would ask for five times as much money. Because of this, two such persons were detained.

Q. All right. In those cases when they charged five times more than they were supposed to for transporting these people, is this documented in tab 82?

A. Yes. This is a document contained in tab 82. There are two persons mentioned here who were detained and handed over to the ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁸ investigating judge because they mistreated citizens and abused their own authority. The judge ordered their detention, and I don't know what happened later, because on the 15th we withdrew, on the 15th of June, 1999.

Q. What is the essence of this, the crime as described here, paragraph 1, 2, 3, 4? It says the personnel of the SUP of Urosevac were collecting information. What does it say?

A. They came to learn that through an unidentified person they found out that passengers were charged foreign currency in order to be transported on buses and five times more than they were supposed to. Should I read further on?

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that they could not find the reference. This is an approximate interpretation.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. On the 5th of May --

THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please not speak at the same time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Don't speak at the same time. You're overlapping.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. It also says that a record was compiled, that the money was taken away, that the person was remanded into custody, statements were taken from a number of Albanians, as you can see on page 2.

A. Yes.

Q. Are the names of the Albanians referred to here? ⁴⁴⁹⁹⁹

A. Yes, three or four names.

Q. All right. So these are abuses. Let me not define them yet again.

Do you have anything that you have to say that somebody was beating these people who were fleeing?

A. Not in the territory of Urosevac.

Q. Were there any such incidents in the territory of the SUP of Urosevac?

A. I'm sure that they weren't, because had I -- they didn't happen because had they happened, I would have been informed.

Q. All right. These persons who were fleeing for the reasons that you mentioned, did they receive humanitarian aid from the authorities?

A. Yes. And practically at all the crossroads along the road there were Red Cross teams. In addition to Red Cross teams, the Civil Defence teams from the Executive Council were there, trying to persuade these persons to go back home. Sometimes they were successful, on other occasions they were not, but we worked on it.

JUDGE KWON: I'm afraid I couldn't find the reference we are talking about.

JUDGE BONOMY: Can I be clear about 82. 82 is about a murder or an assault, and you've told us that it was all to do with commissioning vehicles and abusing the --

MR. NICE: There's a second part to 82 underneath it. It may be that it's not translated. At least on mine it's not. Certainly I couldn't find the reference either. ^{45000 BLANK PAGE 45001}

JUDGE BONOMY: I don't have it.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that apparently the translation provided is a completely different document.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Criminal report for abuse of authority as stipulated in Article 242, paragraph 2, the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia, falsifying official documents from Article 248, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code of Serbia, and article 114.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The English document provided here has an explanation that, on the basis of murder contained in paragraph -- Article 147 -- Havzi Voglici is the name and I assume this is the person who is the victim --

JUDGE BONOMY: The interpreters have already told us that the translation relates to a completely different document.

MR. NICE: For clarity and so we're all working on the same material, I've got that document the accused referred to in English. I then have something marked tab 82 and a document that is clearly longer in text than the translated document, and that document is signed by Stankovic and Trajkovic, whereas the English translation is not apparently signed by anyone. So there it is.

JUDGE KWON: The Chamber has the same.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, we need to get a copy of the correct version.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation].

Q. This is the translation of a document that we haven't got here in Serbian, Mr. Janicevic. It says Oup-Kacanik, February 1999. This is a ⁴⁵⁰⁰² criminal report, again Voglici Zejdin.

A. It probably came from the group of criminal reports that had to do with Zejdin Voglici. He killed a neighbour of his.

Q. Who has the same last name?

A. I don't know.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, move on to 83 and let us hope that we have a correspondence in the documents there.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, before we move on to 83, I didn't rise to object to 81, partly because a notebook of a broadly similar kind had been allowed in a previous session, but I can't really see the basis for admitting 81. It seems to me to be tenuous in the extreme, whatever it is, and I don't follow the interpretation put on the words.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll consider that at the appropriate time. Move on to 83, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. I omitted to tender these past tabs.

JUDGE ROBINSON: If you're tendering them now, we'll have to consider Mr. Nice's objection to 81.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what Mr. Nice's objection refers to. Mr. Janicevic explained that it is a handwritten notification, submitted on the 24th of April by a member of the KLA to his superiors. This note says that the villagers of Burnik were currently in the woods because of fighting in Grebnik and --

JUDGE BONOMY: We can read the translation, but the translation indicates that it's -- it's not a soldier that's written it, it's someone ⁴⁵⁰⁰³ commanding. The whole thing's very confusing and I, at the moment, do not understand what the document is.

JUDGE KWON: And, Mr. Janicevic, I don't think it's a matter for you but for KLA, but I don't understand why they didn't -- why they had to make this kind of notification in writing, by hand.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't answer that question why they did that. All I can say is that in every anti-terrorist action we came across a multitude of such documents. Every patrol coming back from a mission would write a report in longhand, in a notebook or in a special logbook.

This particular note is a notification that a soldier, not a commander, not an officer but a soldier, under the pseudonym of Ljuftari, which means "warrior" in Albanian, informs his base that the villagers of Burnik were hiding in the woods from the fighting taking place in Grebnik, which is ten kilometres away.

JUDGE BONOMY: We can read the document, but you have to bear in mind that Mr. Milosevic has presented to us a document and an English translation, and the English translation refers to the person who has provided the document as being a commander, 1st Battalion. Now, can you read Albanian?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can a little.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, can you read the very end of it, who has signed it?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Albanian, as well, it says from a soldier. From soldier Gaustari [phoen] Ljuftari, and Ljuftari is a ⁴⁵⁰⁰⁴ nickname or a pseudonym.

JUDGE BONOMY: I'm asking you about the very end of the document. What -- can you read what the very last part of it says? There's the date on the left-hand side and there's something else written on the right-hand side.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's probably something that the Serbian translator did not manage to decipher. That's -- we see in signature all sorts of symbols, Xs. Every soldier, every terrorist had a pseudonym, a nom de guerre.

JUDGE BONOMY: Read the end part. Or can you read that part or can't you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is in Albanian. I can't read it.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Can we see if this is a signature, at least?

A. Yes, just a signature. "KB1" and then a signature.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: 79 and 80 we'll admit. 81 we'll not admit. 82 we'll mark for identification pending translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Tell me, Mr. Robinson, why wouldn't 81 be admitted if the Serbian translator could not make out the signature? The point is in the contents, not the signature. Or do you believe the document to be less than authentic, or is there some other reason, or is the only reason that Mr. Nice says it can't be admitted? ⁴⁵⁰⁰⁵

JUDGE ROBINSON: We're not satisfied about its authenticity, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, where did you get this document?

A. I've already said. It was found --

JUDGE ROBINSON: You must move on, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So we have to see what happened to the English translation of 82. In the meantime, Mr. Janicevic, regarding one aspect of the charges, there is a reference to the fact that the people who were moving out as refugees had their documents seized. Can I ask you, as former chief of Urosevac SUP, what do you know about the incidence of seizure of documents from people who were crossing the Albanian border?

A. I found out about such claims after this indictment was brought and made public. If I had known about any such thing, I would have taken measures to stop it if indeed such a thing occurred. I would have made sure that the policemen or other officials concerned be identified and properly punished.

Q. Are you aware of any single incident of documents, IDs being seized?

A. No. I didn't know about anything of the kind until this indictment was made public.

Q. What purpose would seizure of documents have served?

A. I don't see that it would have served any purpose at all in any ⁴⁵⁰⁰⁶ respect.

Q. In 63, paragraph --

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters did not hear which paragraph.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. -- it says --

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

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 63(k).

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. It says that our forces attacked the villages in the municipality of Kacanik and Kacanik town itself, and that this resulted in the destruction of places of worship and houses, including but not limited to the mosques of Kotlina and Ivaja. Is that correct?

A. No, not at all. I don't see how a town can be shelled by an army and the police if the army had been in that town for 50 years. There was a police station in the centre of Kacanik. Less than a kilometre away from the police station was the base of a combat group of the army. I believe the commander of the border battalion was stationed there. I don't see how they were supposed to attack themselves. They were under daily attack of the terrorists.

Q. I'm now talking only about 1999. To what kind of attacks were the army and the police subject to from the beginning of 1999?

A. The citizens and the police in Kacanik were exposed to almost daily attacks on the road from Skopje to Pristina going via Kacanik. The road between Doganovici and Globocica. Citizens who did not agree with ⁴⁵⁰⁰⁷ the terrorist policies of the KLA were kidnapped and taken away. Nobody knows where. Some of them were eventually released during anti-terrorist operations. Others were never seen again, unfortunately. In this area, it was mostly Albanians who were abducted.

Q. So in the majority of cases it was Albanians who were abducted.

A. Correct.

Q. Do you know anything about the identity of Albanians who were abducted in Kacanik in that particular series of attacks?

A. I do. I can give you examples, plus we have this list, the list of persons who had signed contracts for local security.

Q. You are trying to say that it was mainly Albanians who had contracted to become local security men who were abducted.

A. Yes.

Q. Is that tab 83?

A. Yes.

Q. What does it say?

A. The list of persons who had signed the contract for local security for Kacanik municipality.

Q. What is the date?

A. 2nd November 1998.

Q. What else do we see?

A. Name, number of uniform, personal sidearm.

Q. What about the next list?

A. That is a list of persons who had applied to become local security men in the municipality of Kacanik while not having weapons. ⁴⁵⁰⁰⁸

Q. Unfortunately, I don't have an English translation here. I don't know if you do. Maybe it was simply omitted from my binder.

A. I don't have one.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, do you have an English translation?

JUDGE ROBINSON: I think we have. We have an English translation of -- is this 83?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we have an English translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So the first list contains 38 names, bears the seal and signature of the president of the Municipal Council. Thirty-eight persons, with the number of their uniform indicated and type of weapon carried. And the other list is dated 26th of January, 1999.

A. Yes. But there are some persons who, in the meantime, had been issued with weapons. There's only one exception; Agim Idrizi.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Janicevic, you explained that the allegation in paragraph (k) was to be questioned because Kacanik was already occupied by Serb forces and therefore for that reason it was unlikely that Serb forces would attack Kacanik. I have heard that explanation before, but it's not clear to me exactly what is meant by that. If Serb forces are in Kacanik and they're in a particular location, why would it not be possible for the Serbs to attack the village nonetheless? ⁴⁵⁰⁰⁹

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I'm -- I hope you don't mind my saying so, but can I ask you how can Serb forces attack a town in whose centre they are located themselves, which they patrol every day, every day, day and night? A town that, until the end of the war, had never been held by the terrorists. There were several attempts by the terrorists to take over the town, to seize the police station, to expel the army from those positions, but they were unsuccessful. There were a number of attacks, terrorists attacks, on the army and the police. Why would police forces attack the town if they are already holding it?

JUDGE ROBINSON: They're already in occupation, so there would be no need for them to attack the town. That's what you are saying?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would not use the word "occupation," but if somebody is stationed in a town for 50 years, doing their job, it's not occupation. They're in their own town. It's not an occupation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Let me ask you a very specific question: Was Kacanik under the control of our forces throughout the war?

A. Absolutely. Our forces handed over the town to the KFOR under the agreement.

Q. So throughout the war, Kacanik was under the control of our forces?

A. Correct. ⁴⁵⁰¹⁰

JUDGE ROBINSON: This is all of Kacanik.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The whole of the town of Kacanik, yes, was under our control.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, could you explain to us this second list which was signed -- actually, it was sent to the Secretariat of the Interior, to the head of the Urosevac SUP; is that right? That's you.

A. Yes.

Q. It was signed by an Albanian.

A. Yes.

Q. So what does it say on the stamp? You have it in Serbian and Albanian. On the stamp itself, what does it say there?

A. Kosovo Democratic Initiative. That is a party of Albanians with headquarters or the Municipal Board in Kacanik.

Q. And the president of the party?

A. It was Seljim Topojani, and his deputy was Saip Reka, but unfortunately, both of them were kidnapped and killed in a very brutal manner.

Q. And he drew up a list and sent it to you of individuals who reported to do local security work and had no weapons and expected to be issued them; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. All right. Just to make that clear. On the first list we have some 38 names and on the second list 17 names, which makes it a total of ⁴⁵⁰¹¹ 55 persons. Were they -- did they mostly fall casualty?

A. Twenty-one of them were kidnapped, the fate is ten is not known.

Q. Very well. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now, Mr. Robinson, I'd like to tender tab 83. May it be exhibited, both these lists?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now, did the SUP of Urosevac take any steps to uncover the kidnapped Albanians, to find them, and the perpetrators of these crimes? Did they take any steps to do that?

A. After every report of kidnapping, the SUP of Urosevac went out in the field to check it out and took steps to uncover what had happened. On the 27th of February, 1999, a person was kidnapped, an activist of the party, in fact, and his name was Riza Kiki, and he was a member of the local security, too, in the village of Gajre. The commander of the police station in Kacanik, the late Bogoljub Sajetovic [phoen], who was a police captain, was called up on the phone by the terrorists and informed that Riza Kiki had been kidnapped and that he would be killed. Now, he went out to check this out in the village of Gajre, which is two and a half kilometres away from Kacanik, to the house there, and he was -- there was an ambush set up in a stream, and he and the patrol that was with him were shot at from and hand-held rocket launcher, from automatic rifles, and he was killed on the spot. In addition to him, four policemen were wounded.

Q. So he went to look for the kidnapped Albanian, having received ⁴⁵⁰¹² information over the phone, he was caught in an ambush and lost his life there, and three other policemen were wounded; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Now, in this -- was the staff of the MUP in Pristina and the Kosovo Verification Mission informed about that event?

A. The Kosovo Information Mission -- or Verification Mission was informed before us about the kidnapping of Riza Kiki, before us, and they came to the police station to check out the validity of the information they had received, and they -- the commanding officer offered that they could go together and check out the situation. It was a Sunday, I believe, but they refused.

Q. So they arrived. He offered, Srdemovic [phoen] offered that they could go out and check the situation out together, and they refused. And had they gone, they would have been caught in the ambush.

A. Well, had they gone maybe they would not have been -- there would not have been an ambush, but I assume there would have been nonetheless. But otherwise, in every terrorist action and police action undertaken, either to apprehend the perpetrators of a crime or any violations or misdemeanors that had been carried out, or pursuant to a court order, the Verification Mission was informed of all these matters, and they had their department in Kacanik, their office in Kacanik.

Q. So what operation was this?

A. It was an operative action to check out the information received by telephone to see if it was true or not. And after that, they went in search of the terrorist group and learnt that the group had put up in the ⁴⁵⁰¹³ village of Ivaja, that that was where the Main Staff of the 162nd Brigade was located, that they had a substaff in the village of Kotlina with about 70 members, in the village of Pustenik as well, Palivodenica, and several other villages in the area.

Q. And what was undertaken to find and apprehend the people who, from the beginning of the NATO aggression, launched attacks on civilian police and military features in Kacanik, in Kacanik and the surrounding area?

A. Measures were taken to find them and apprehend them, together with the border battalion of the army, since most of the Kacanik municipality lies along the border belt. The police went out in search of the terrorists. Sometimes it was successful, sometimes not, but it didn't stop its search until the 24th of March, that is to say the first day the bombing started.

Some of the people who had been kidnapped in those anti-terrorist actions were liberated. They were freed. However, the terrorists were successful in taking some of these to other places and all trace is lost of them.

Q. A moment ago you said that Kacanik was under the control of our forces throughout. You explained that to us. Now, can you give us an explanation with relation to a detail in count 63(k), paragraph 63(k), where it says allegedly that, in addition to our attacks in Kacanik, that houses and religious sites were destroyed in Kotlina and Ivaja.

A. It's not true that the houses were destroyed and the mosques in Kotlina and Ivaja. In the village of Ivaja, for example - and I've repeated it several times - is where the headquarters and staff of the ⁴⁵⁰¹⁴ 162nd Terrorist Brigade was located. And in the other village, there was the substaff, numbering about 80 people. In the search to apprehend the terrorists, the joint forces of the army and the police dealt with Ivaja first and then Kotlina in this anti-terrorist operation. And the last time they entered Kotlina, on the 24th of March, as I was informed, there was an attack. As the army and police passed through the village, there was an attack launched on them from a hill where there was a bunker, and a group of terrorists came out of the bunker and shot at the police and army members in the back. After that, the terrorists were surrounded and in combat they were killed.

The bunker was the size of -- or, rather, it was about 4 by 8 metres. There were two bunkers, in fact, two entrances to a bunker, one horizontal and one lateral, and 50 metres away there was a corridor that had been dug out, and according to my technicians, about 200 members of the terrorist organisation could be accommodated in that corridor dugout.

Q. Now, you mentioned the 24th of March. Look at what it says in paragraph 63(i).

JUDGE BONOMY: Are you able to tell us anything about the destruction of the mosques?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no destruction of the mosques. Had there been any, I would certainly have been informed about it.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Paragraph 63(i), it says that: "On or about the 8th of March, 1999, forces of the FRY and Serbia attacked and partially burnt the ⁴⁵⁰¹⁵ village of Kotlina. On the 24th of March, 1999 -" that's the date you just mentioned - "they attacked Kotlina again with heavy weapon systems and soldiers. Many of the male residents of Kotlina fled into nearby forests during this attack while the forces of the FRY and Serbia ordered the women, children, and elderly to board trucks which took them towards the town of Kacanik. Those who could not fit into the trucks were compelled to walk behind them towards Kacanik. A number of male residents of Kotlina were killed during this attack, including at least 17 men whose bodies were thrown into wells. Before departing Kotlina, forces of the FRY and Serbia burnt the remainder of the village." Is any of what I've just read out to you true, or are parts of it true or what?

A. None of that is true. First of all, on the 8th of March, the verifiers followed the entire operation both in Kotlina and Ivaja. After that operation, I talked to the verifiers and they never, not at any single point did they make any complaints or say that there had been destruction in Kotlina and Ivaja. They told us that in the village of Kotlina they were -- the population was fleeing, fled away and could the population go back to their village? I said they could because it was their village and their houses. There was no mention at all of a single house being set fire to. And there were four of them, four verifiers. I can't remember their names, although we do have the names in our report. On the 24th of March, there were no verifiers there. The population -- or, rather, I explained a moment ago what happened, how the event unfolded; they attacked the police and army from the rear, from ^{45016 BLANK PAGE 45017} their backs. They came out of the bunker, they were surrounded and lost their lives in the fighting. As I was informed, there were not 17 but in fact 22 persons, 22 terrorists, and the list says 17. There was an on-site investigation conducted, a set of photographs was established, and the investigating judge went out on the spot. Everything was documented.

The population, the inhabitants who had fled were fleeing as of the 8th of March and even before. They took to the forests, and they went down a slope to reach the railway line and the Skopje Kacanik communication line or road. And they were hungry and tired, and that's how they came out onto the road. And my policemen gave the people their own lunch packets.

In talking to the citizens, and there's documents -- there are documents to bear that out, it says that the terrorists forced them out of their homes and forced them to flee and take to the forest, to show that this was a humanitarian catastrophe, to portray it as such. And I say that with full responsibility. They waited for them, they took them to Kacanik, they put them up in the cultural centre there, together with representatives of the Red Cross and the Civil Defence staff. They gave them food and clothing, and after that, the people went off where they wanted to go. Most of them went back to their village, the village that they had come from in the first place.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Is this information that was provided to you, information that the terrorists forced the villagers to flee; and if so, who provided that information to you? ⁴⁵⁰¹⁸

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that there is an Official Note and report in the documents, and the interviews conducted with the villagers of Kotlina and the other village, I think it was called Pustenik. So every village in that border belt had an occasion where the population took to the forests and fled.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm asking, how did you come by that information? Is it from reading the reports?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the citizens. Yes, I read reports from my officers based on the statements taken from the citizens of Kotlina -- or, rather, villagers.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Some wells are mentioned here. Let me just tell you that we didn't provide all these photographs here, but we provided them when Obrad Stevanovic testified about Kotlina, and I assume you're mentioning the photo documents there because it was your Urosevac SUP that took them. Now, what wells are we talking about here?

A. I explained this a moment ago. There weren't any wells. I don't think anybody would be mad to dig a well on the top of a hill. That's the first point.

Secondly, they were specially made bunkers. One had not been completed, its construction wasn't finished. It had -- it lacked a covering, a cover. But I have some photographs here showing those so-called wells, if you would like to take a look at them on the overhead projector. ⁴⁵⁰¹⁹

Q. Yes. Put them on the overhead projector. Let's take a look at them. Let's go through them very quickly.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues]... the so-called wells.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is one of the horizontal entrances to that so-called well. There was a vertical one and then they made a horizontal entrance, and that's the entrance here. Beside the entrance was one of the terrorists who was killed. There's another one over here. I think that so far in my practice in the police force, my experience, I never came across anybody putting a furnace, a tin furnace, in a well. This is the tin furnace that has burnt down, and that tin furnace was in the bunker which the terrorists used for heating when it was cold.

Now, this is the civilian, the person they say is a civilian. You can part of a uniform and boots.

Here is another photograph, showing a rifle.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... if we're supposed to make sense of it, I suppose we ought to look at it and see what the witness is pointing to.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You'd like to see it a little more, Mr. Nice, is that it?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is that sufficient?

MR. NICE: I now see what he's pointing to. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: When would this photograph have been taken?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That civilian -- they were taken on ⁴⁵⁰²⁰ the 24th of March in the afternoon hours after the terrorist operation had concluded. In 1999, of course.

Parts of the uniform. This is the lower half, and army boots, and a rifle next to him.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And whose body are we looking at? Are you able to say?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. An unidentified terrorist, or at least I don't know his name, nor did we -- nor were we able to identify him at that time. The original photographic material already exists in Court.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So your reference to so-called wells is to indicate what?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to say that they weren't wells at all, that they were bunkers.

MR. NICE: He says that this original photographic material exists in the Court. I think he's probably correct because I recognise one of those photographs as having been displayed before, but perhaps the accused could tell us what the exhibit number is so that I can dig it out and have a look at it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, can you assist?

JUDGE KWON: The cross-reference says that tab 84 and 85 are tab 212 of 299.

MR. NICE: I'm much obliged.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You may remove it now.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁵⁰²¹

Q. In this first part of paragraph 63, it says that on the 8th of March, our forces attacked the village on the 8th of March and partially burned it. You just mentioned that that was the date when the KVM was there.

A. Yes, that's right. The verifiers were practically in the field with the police and the military.

Q. All right.

A. Let me just add one more thing. On the 8th of March, there were five vehicles of the Verification Mission in Kotlina after the action. Five vehicles, with two verifiers in every one of them, that makes a total of ten. So ten verifiers did not see that the village was destroyed, that the mosques were destroyed, everything else that is contained in this paragraph. Now, I really don't know how this came to appear.

Q. All right. What about the bodies of the -- thrown into the wells? You explained that these were not wells.

A. They're not wells, and they were not thrown in. After carrying out the on-site investigation, when night fell, the investigation team withdrew, together with the forces that were in the sector. The population that went down to the road and the railway was transferred to Kacanik and put up at the cultural centre. Others went to stay with relatives or friends. They were taken care of. Those who needed medical assistance were taken to the health centre because it is close to the cultural centre. And practically there were no objections raised. A group of about 20 persons was brought into custody. They were suspected of being terrorists, judging by the way they looked and the uniforms they ⁴⁵⁰²² had. In the meantime, they had thrown their weapons away. The paraffin glove test was applied to all of them. All the tests were positive. Not a single person was detained. They were all released so that we would not cause any kind of dissatisfaction among the members of the Albanian community in the area.

Q. Or, rather, you established that they had been shooting and you nevertheless released them, let them go home?

A. Yes. We thought that they would stay with their families and that they would not return to the terrorist groups that were in the area.

Q. Partial documentation in relation to what we've been saying just now about Kotlina, is it contained in tabs 84 and 85? Please look at tab 84 and 85. This is a document that was compiled on the 24th of March, 1999.

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Photo documentation is being provided.

A. To the investigating judge of the municipal court in Urosevac.

Q. In relation to the crime of terrorism in the village of Kotlina, municipality of Kacanik.

A. That's right.

Q. And you can see who received it and when.

A. Yes.

Q. Then there is a list.

A. And a complete list of the photo documentation contained and all the objects found on site.

Q. All right. And then tab 85 refers to photo documentation from ⁴⁵⁰²³ Ivaja, or was it Kotlina? No, this is the village of Kotlina. Kotlina. And then it says Ivaja in brackets.

A. The photo documentation was both for Kotlina and Ivaja. The first part is Ivaja.

Q. No. As far as I can see, the first part is the staff of Kotlina.

A. Yes, yes, Kotlina, Kotlina.

JUDGE BONOMY: These two tabs appear to be confused in the copies we have. There's a list of what they're supposed to be in number 84, but the photographs generally appear to be in 85.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Precisely.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Black and white photographs, not in colour.

JUDGE KWON: The -- the picture which appears in the middle of the fourth page, is it not the picture we saw just now, the original one you showed us?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

JUDGE KWON: And these two tabs are as I noted, tab 212 of D299. Let's move on.

[Trial Chamber confers]

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Look at photograph 19. Even without a translation provided, it will be easy for you to see what it is. Indeed, you can see the entrance here into this facility that looks like a well.

A. Underneath is a photograph with some steps.

Q. And then you can see a ladder on photograph 20, the next ⁴⁵⁰²⁴ photograph.

A. Yes.

Q. Was -- is this the weapons that were seized in the area?

A. Yes.

Q. There is also something that's in colour here towards the end, towards the end of this tab 85. A few moments ago we couldn't see them properly.

A. I haven't got this.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know whether you have these colour photographs, gentlemen, at the end of tab 85.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we do.

MR. NICE: No, I don't.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, we have two pages of colour and one black and white.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I have several pages of photographs in black and white and three of colour photographs. It's probably -- all of this is --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, it's quite confusing. You get a lot of help from everybody in this Court, but you must sort this one out yourself.

MR. NICE: I have my colour version now from Ms. Dicklich, for which I'm grateful.

MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour, perhaps I could check in the break as to precisely what has been exhibited before, because it seems that there may be new photographs. ⁴⁵⁰²⁵

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Thank you, Ms. Higgins.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did the members of the Urosevac SUP interview the inhabitants of the Kotlina and Ivaja? If they did, what did they learn; and if they didn't, just say no.

A. They did interview the inhabitants of Ivaja and Kotlina, and what they learned from them is what I referred to a few moments ago, that the terrorists had forced them to flee into the forests.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... we're going to be privileged to see or is this just coming in the form of oral hearsay?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, this cannot be information based on rumours because it is the chief of the Secretariat of the Ministry of the Interior who is testifying here, or, if you want to use your own vocabulary, the chief of police in that area. So he is not talking about rumours. He is talking about information that he learned in the course of carrying out his duties.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well --

JUDGE ROBINSON: If he's able to, he should provide the source of the information.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you heard Mr. Robinson.

A. The source of information are Official Notes and statements that were collected by my employees from the citizens of Ivaja and Kotlina on the 8th of March and the 24th of March, after the anti-terrorist actions were brought to an end. I think or -- rather, I'm sure that these ⁴⁵⁰²⁶ statements are contained in that first group of tabs, if I'm not mistaken.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Which ones are that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first binder. The first or the second binder, I'm not too sure. Would you like me to look it up during the break so that I don't keep you any longer now?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Yes. Find it for us in the break. Mr. Nice will be interested in that, no doubt.

We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10:32 a.m.

--- Upon resuming at 10:56 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Higgins.

MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour, can I attempt to clarify tabs 84 and 85.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MS. HIGGINS: If you go first of all to tab 84, the first page is in fact D299, tab 211, and the rest is D299 tab 212. In tab 84, you will see that there is a list, quite a difficult list to read, which looks like this, if I can show for Your Honours' assistance. It's a faint list which has S1 to S26, and that is a list for the black and white photo set that is in tab 85. Have Your Honours located that?

The second page, which is also a list, 1 to 31, appears to be the list of equipment, a translation of which we have further on in tab 84. If we then turn to tab 85, the first eight pages of black and white photographs are already exhibited as D299, tab 212. After the first ⁴⁵⁰²⁷ eight pages, Your Honours should have a list, which is -- I have in my bundle a list 1 to 31 again, which is an equipment list repeat. There is a final black and white photo at the end of your bundle, two photos, which very faintly looks as if it says S1.something 5. From our research, these photographs, two photographs, have not been exhibited before.

JUDGE KWON: I don't think we have the two pictures.

JUDGE ROBINSON: One. I think we have one.

MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour, I have two black and white photographs.

JUDGE BONOMY: They're the first of the black and white photos on mine. Is that them?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MS. HIGGINS: Those two photographs have not been previously admitted. And then we come to the first colour photograph, which has been shown on the ELMO. The first colour set of photographs, the first page, is actually a colour set of the black and white which you already have, and it's the last three colour photos that are new. In my submission, it may be more prudent that --

JUDGE BONOMY: What do the last three look like? My last group is four.

MS. HIGGINS: I have --

JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, that's the one. Okay. Thank you.

MS. HIGGINS: And this one. So those three are the new photographs, along with the one I've just referred to, the last black and white. ⁴⁵⁰²⁸ For the sake of prudence, it might be better, I would submit, to just allow the photographs to come in, having most of them been admitted, but it may be better to tie up with the materials that are already in the file for the sake of ease of reference later on for analysis purposes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Ms. Higgins. We'll admit 85 as one exhibit, as Ms. Higgins has suggested, including the colour photographs.

I thought 84 had already been --

JUDGE KWON: Yes, 84 is already admitted as tab 211 and tab 212 of Exhibit 299.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Higgins, I understood you to say, and I may have misunderstood, but there are two lists of equipment in tab 84, and you didn't indicate that either of these had been admitted already, did you?

MS. HIGGINS: If I can just clarify that, Your Honour. In tab 84 there is a list of equipment which has previously been admitted. It is D299, tab 212. The only clarification I sought to give you was that the first page of that is incorrectly indexed. It is, in fact, D299, tab 211.

JUDGE BONOMY: I'm sorry. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have now received a translation of tab 82. So that will now be admitted.

Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Then I won't go back to tab 82, because I got the translation that you got just now and that you ⁴⁵⁰²⁹ admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, in relation to the question pertaining to interviews about what happened in Ivaja and Kotlina, you mentioned that in your records you had some documents indicating these interviews. Did you manage to find any of them during the break?

A. I found three statements, because I had very little time. One is 18.11. So it is tab 18.11, Ljuta Berat, who claims that "... on the 7th of March, 1999 -" that is a day before the anti-terrorist action in Ivaja started - "around 2100 hours when we villagers of Ivaja, municipality of Kacanik, left our houses with our families and in the woods between Ivaja village and Ljaci neighbourhood I met forester..." so-and-so, and then he says what he talked about to him.

That is a day before the anti-terrorist action. So that is one such statement. There is tens of them, but I didn't have time to look them all up now. Let me indicate some more.

One more: Hoxha Islam is the person.

Q. What tab?

A. Tab 25.

Q. You mean 18.25?

A. Yes. He says that on the 28th he went to see his father-in-law in Gajre, on the 28th of February, that is, and he explains what he saw there. It's somewhere towards the middle of the page. I don't know which paragraph it is. I underlined it. Should I read it out?

JUDGE KWON: For the record it's not 18.25. It's just tab 25. ⁴⁵⁰³⁰

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. I'm so sorry. It is tab 25. Somewhere just below the middle, he says that before the anti-terrorist operation he ran into the station commander in Gajre. He talked to him, and he says that they told him that the police were coming. And when he came to the yard of his father-in-law, the father-in-law was already getting ready to leave the house, and together with the father-in-law and all the other villagers, he went to the woods before the anti-terrorist operation was carried out, the one in which Bogoljub Sajetovic was killed. So that's in tab 25, somewhere in the middle of the text.

And I found another one which is a record on taking a statement, tab 26. Abazi Camil gave the statement. That is the document in which it was disputed who exactly signed the statement on behalf of authorised officials.

He says in the beginning of the statement, starting with: "Ten days ago, or more precisely on the 26th of February, 1999, together with my family and other villagers of Ljac hamlet, Pustenik village, Kacanik municipality, we organised a column of refugees, following orders of Acif Ljaci, representative of our hamlet, out of fear because in the immediate vicinity of our hamlet several artillery shells had exploded. Acif Ljaci later became commander of the KLA for the village of Pustenik." We can see that clearly from this statement.

JUDGE ROBINSON: That is in the statement? What you just said is part of the statement or is it just evidence that you --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's part the statement. ⁴⁵⁰³¹

JUDGE ROBINSON: Is there a translation of tab 26 in English? There isn't one in my text.

Okay. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you have explained that a number of people, based on the information you had collected, were brought in for interrogation and were later, all of them, released.

A. Correct. If I may add one more thing. In tab 25, on page number 2, or maybe page number 3, one page seems to be missing, it says: "That night, OSCE representatives told the villagers of Gajre to leave the village and go to Bob village or to Kacanik because the police would come to maltreat and beat innocent villagers. Following orders of OSCE representatives, the villagers of Gajre left the village the same night and went to Bob village, Kacanik municipality, where I went, too, with my family."

That is a statement by Islam Hoxha.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we continue, Mr. Robinson? Can we move on?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, in paragraph 63(ii) it says: "On the 27th and 28th of March, forces of the FRY and Serbia attacked the town of Kacanik. They harassed, detained, beat, and shot many Kosovo Albanian residents of Kacanik, as a result of which thousands of persons fled to nearby forests and eventually walked across the border into Macedonia. Other persons, ^{45032 BLANK PAGE 45033} other displaced persons from the town of Kacanik and nearby villages walked to the village of Stagovo where they boarded trains that took them to the Macedonian border."

You don't have to repeat the explanation that Kacanik was under our control throughout that time. I'm interested in the latter part of this paragraph concerning the village of Stagovo and the claim that these displaced persons walked to Macedonia. Do you know anything about this?

A. This assertion makes no sense at all. Stagovo is closer to the central part of Kosovo, closer to Urosevac. Kacanik has a police station, and it's 30 kilometres away from the Djeneral Jankovic crossing, through the gorge. I don't know why they would take that route to the border. That is a very long way.

Q. Do you know anything about this shooting in Kacanik, the shooting of the citizens and the expulsion of civilians?

A. I can claim with full responsibility that there was no shooting of citizens in Kacanik. There was no shooting as such. I know that. I would have known about it if there had been any, and of course I would have taken appropriate measures against offenders, but it didn't happen.

Q. Tell me, did the police station in Kacanik work throughout the war? Did they perform their regular duties?

A. Until the 12th of June, 1999, the police station in Kacanik operated and so did the section of internal affairs. On the 10th of June, we carried out an on-site investigation in the killing of two Macedonians near Skopje. It was performed by the team that went out from Kacanik town. ⁴⁵⁰³⁴

Q. Very well. Mr. Janicevic, if all these allegations are untrue, then why did the citizens of Kacanik leave their homes at that time?

A. I just spoke about the killing of Mahmut Daliste and his neighbour Reka Camil. Their bodies were held for two days in the yard of a house in Rakovac mahala to intimidate the other residents, to show them that whoever is not with them is against them.

Second, they spread rumours that NATO would make a ground invasion just in the area of Kacanik. Many of my neighbours asked me if this information was true. I'm sorry I didn't tell them that it was true, because they would be alive today. As it were, they were brutally killed as soon as NATO came into the area of Kacanik.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I want to return to the -- this question of Kacanik being under the control of the Serb forces, thereby making it unlikely that Serb forces would attack Kacanik. Is it Kacanik the town that was under the control of Serb forces, as distinct from the municipality of Kacanik?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. The town of Kacanik was under the absolute control of Serb forces, both the police and the army, while terrorist forces were stationed in certain villages.

JUDGE ROBINSON: In paragraph (k) of the indictment, that is 63(k), Mr. Milosevic, the allegation is that forces of the FRY and Serbia attacked villages in the Kacanik municipality and the town of Kacanik itself.

So, Mr. Janicevic, the explanation that you gave that Kacanik was under Serb control, that would apply to the town but not necessarily to ⁴⁵⁰³⁵ the villages in the municipality.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, most villages in the area of Kacanik municipality were under the control of Serb forces. Until the 28th of February, 1999, the police freely entered any village in the area of Kacanik municipality. Any village. I claim this with full responsibility. Reckoning that there were going to be no problems, and there were indeed no problems until the 28th, 28th of February, 1999, the police went into this village to check the situation, and that's why two policemen were killed. Things later deteriorated. The police and the army did not have any reason to attack villages inhabited by Albanians. Albanians were at the time citizens of Yugoslavia, and nowadays Serbia and Montenegro. I hope they are still the citizens of that country. Nobody had any reason to fear the army or the police. They were fleeing from fighting and from the terrorists. Those who did not accept their ideas had no hope of living to see the morrow. I'm telling you, many of my friends met their end in that way.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. A very specific question: Were there any cases of expulsion of Albanians in that area?

A. Certainly not on the part of the police or the army.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Janicevic. Paragraph 63(iv), it says: "On or about 25 May 1999, forces of the FRY and Serbia attacked the village of Dubrava in the municipality of Kacanik. During the attack, forces of the FRY and Serbia killed several Kosovo Albanian residents of Dubrava. Many ⁴⁵⁰³⁶ residents of Dubrava formed a convoy of tractors and trailers and fled to Macedonia. Other residents fled to other villages or into forests before eventually crossing the border into Macedonia."

Do you know anything about this incident that allegedly occurred on the 25th of May; that is, an attack on the village of Dubrava, the killing of several residents - it says several Kosovo Albanians here - and the death of many others?

A. It's not true that there was any killing. Some people may have got killed in the fighting. Every day we had a dozen terrorists attacks in that area. The road to Tetovo and Globocica passes by Dubrava. An hour would not pass without an attack on a police patrol, an army patrol, a transport convoy, customs officers, civilians. In the last few days of the war, an hour would not pass in peace. I don't see how the police could attack. They had to defend themselves, though. If they hadn't defended themselves, that would have been quite good for the terrorists, wouldn't it?

Q. Mr. Janicevic, 66(l) says that: "From March to May 1999, forces of the FRY and Serbia launched a series of massive offensives against several villages in the municipality of Kacanik, which resulted in the deaths of more than 100 civilians."

A. That is nonsense. The truth is that there are 93 people killed, and this photograph is to be found in the shop window of a photo studio in Kacanik.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Tab 86 shows this collective photo of members of the KLA of the 162nd Brigade who were killed while fighting ⁴⁵⁰³⁷ our forces.

Very well. Mr. Robinson, I would like to tender this document as well.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, tell us now briefly what you know about the consequences of the NATO bombing at civilian features in the Urosevac SUP area, the Stimlje Kacanik, Strpce municipalities and Urosevac municipality.

A. I'll try and remember all the details of that. In Strpce, for example, two repeaters of the RTS were destroyed. At least that's one and another one. In the Kacanik area, the PTT cross-section, very important for the whole area and the south of the Balkans, and also another thing that was bombed was the Simpo factory, the administrative building of the factory.

In the Urosevac area, near the agricultural airport, where there were hangars belonging to the factory farm, they were completely destroyed, and an FM repeat -- transmitter was bombed, and during the bombing there was a lot of damage to houses in the village of Varos, which is close by, close by the airport, the agricultural airport. In Staro Selo, several houses were damaged and the Orthodox cemetery was almost completely destroyed under the NATO bombing. In Urosevac on a number of occasions bombs attacked a 110-kilowatt power station, transformer station, which led to serious material damage. In Stimlje, at the entrance to Stimlje and Brnac [phoen] two bombs ⁴⁵⁰³⁸ fell which destroyed a number of private dwellings. In Urosevac a bomb fell within the factory producing pipes, and a large part of the settlement and some Albanian houses were destroyed, Albanian houses bordering on the factory compound, and seven or eight persons were injured. I'm not quite sure of the exact number. I apologise if I've got the number wrong.

In the village of Donja Batina, another bomb fell. That is also the Strpce area, general area of Strpce, and some ten houses were damaged.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, are you going to relate through this witness the effects of the bombing to the charges in the indictment? You must relate it to your case and to the Prosecution case. And as I understand it, it may be relevant in terms of persons fleeing. It may also be relevant in terms of your contention that there was collaboration between NATO and the UCK.

The point I'm making is that this case is not about NATO bombing and the effects. You should try to relate it to the case that you're presenting in your Defence, to show that either people fled because of the bombing and not because, as is alleged in the indictment, of the crimes committed by Serb forces.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It has double importance, a twofold importance, Mr. Robinson. First of all, on the basis of what the witness has just said with respect to the NATO bombing, we can see that there was mass bombing, and certainly anybody with any reason can assume that people fled in the face of it.

And secondly, during the bombing, the witness mentioned several ⁴⁵⁰³⁹ examples of how the houses were damaged, too, houses belonging to the population. And what Mr. Nice says, this is ascribed to destruction by Serb forces and FRY forces.

So on the one hand we have bombing as the reason for which people fled, and on the other hand, as a consequence of the bombing, we have the destruction of a large number of features which otherwise are ascribed to the forces of the FRY and Serbia, and they never shelled any villages, they just engaged in combat against terrorists, and that is what the witness said on several occasions.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You will be relating this to specific charges in the indictment. That's my point.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's related to --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Not through this witness but through some other witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I think through this witness as well, because all these places are mentioned in what Mr. Nice likes to call an indictment, and the destruction of houses quite obviously represents the consequence of the NATO bombing. The fleeing of the population also is a consequence of NATO's bombing, and the witness has been speaking about the extent of the activity and the aggression against my country, the extent of it, which caused these consequences and results. And this activity brings such consequences all over our planet, all over the globe. Where there is bombing, civilians flee. Where there is bombing, houses are destroyed, houses are burning.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, it is a matter for you how you ⁴⁵⁰⁴⁰ present your Defence, but if I were representing your Defence, I would attempt to be a little more specific and try to relate it to charges in the indictment. As it is, if you merely say that there was mass bombing, then -- and you lead no evidence specifically to show that persons fled because of the bombing, you would be left in your address to merely put to the Chamber what you are just putting without any specific evidence from persons to say that they fled because of the indictment. You will raise it as an argument in your address or in your written submissions, but there won't be any sound evidential basis.

Proceed. You will be asking us to infer from what you call the mass bombings that persons fled because you say it's reasonable. Any reasonable person would know that persons would flee if their villages are bombed, but your case would be much stronger if you're able to show that through -- through evidence, through the evidence of witnesses. And similarly, you say that the bombing is important also because destruction which the indictment attributes to Serb forces is properly the result of that bombing. That has to be addressed in more specific terms.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't understand, Mr. Robinson, how I can be more specific when we have a witness here who is speaking about his own area, his own Secretariat of the Interior, Urosevac, Stimlje, and Strpce municipalities. Here we have Urosevac, Stimlje, and Kacanik, and they have been quoted in the indictment as places where some sort of crimes on the part of the FRY forces and Serbia were committed, and he said that none of that was true and he explained what was true and ⁴⁵⁰⁴¹ correct. So I'm asking him now what is correct. He's explaining that none of it is correct. I'm asking whether he knows anything about the NATO bombing, and he's telling us what he knows about the NATO bombing. Whether there was expulsion of the population, he claims there was not. Whether the object was to kill a civilian, he claims it was not. And that's what I claim too.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Was there a single -- was there a case in the village of Doganovic where a group of children were killed from the results of cluster bombs?

A. Yes. Five children of Albanian ethnicity were killed, I think it was the month of May, from cluster bombs.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Okay. Stop there. Is there an allegation in the indictment that these five persons were killed by Serb forces? This may be an illustration of the approach that you are taking. Otherwise, what is the importance of this evidence that five children were killed by -- by the bombs?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, in the indictment there's very little mention of children, but they are in fact mentioned in several places, child casualties. Here we have a specific event where they were killed -- where children were killed by NATO bombs. I don't see that there were not children killed in some other incidents, too, but if you look at all the numbers in Kosovo, then it's easy to establish the ratio between the terrorists arrested who were released after the war and those who lost their lives in clashes with the forces of the army of Yugoslavia ⁴⁵⁰⁴² and police, et cetera. And you'll be able to draw your own conclusions just looking at the figures whether it was an intent to throw -- expulse anyone, or kill them or something else.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, how did the NATO aggression affect our country, its organisation, weapons, the KLA forces, and so on?

JUDGE ROBINSON: That's not a proper question to put to the witness, how did the aggression --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm encouraging you, Mr. Milosevic, to do something other than present a broad picture of the situation. The more specific you can, then you should be.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. I'll be quite specific.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, take a look at tab 87, now, please, if you would. Is that a document of the KLA, the operative zone, Nerodimlje operation zone, or tell us what it says in the upper left-hand corner.

A. Kosovo liberation army, Nerodimlje operation zone, 161st Ahmet Kaciku Brigade number 184, date the 29th of March, 1999.

Q. So that is four days after the beginning of the aggression; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, read what it says next. It says: "To the 1st Battalion ..."

A. "To the 1st Battalion, in view of the circumstances that have ⁴⁵⁰⁴³ arisen and on seeing the order of the ZON command, the following order is hereby issued. Order: Ordering all battalion and company commanders, companies, that is my company commander, 1, to assume a high state of readiness this evening, the 29th of March, 1999, from the moment this order is received.

"Number 2: To position soldiers on the hilltops surrounding the territory they control.

"3: This order is issued because we know that an air drop is expected.

"4: Everything happening in the field (amounts, locations, et cetera) should be reported to your command and our command."

Q. All right, and the date is Malopoljce 29th of March, 1999.

A. Yes. And the brigade commander signed it and his pseudonym was Granit.

Q. This is the original of the order that we have. We have it in Albanian. And the number was the 29th of March of the 161st Brigade. What does this order tell you?

A. This order tells us about the cooperation between NATO forces in the air and terrorist forces on the ground. And this indicates that the terrorists were the infantry of the NATO Air Force in that area, in that region. And on several occasions we received intelligence that they were being given assistance from the air, in the air of Jezerce and the mountains around there, from Budakovo to Malopoljce, Racak, et cetera. During the night mostly, air drops during the night containing ammunition, weapons, and other combat equipment. ⁴⁵⁰⁴⁴

Q. All right. Fine. Now, in addition to this, the air drops, NATO air drops to the KLA, was there any other form of assistance? Do you know of any other form of assistance that came in from abroad? Don't give us any general answers, try and give general answers, just specifically.

A. I know that volunteers came from America, for example. I know that there was material aid and assistance sent across land and from the air, as we said, illegally into the country, and sometimes at legal border crossing points under different documents. But there were a lot of volunteers coming in from America. American citizens, I mean.

Q. How do you come to know that?

A. I know that on the basis of intelligence received. And also in Jezerce we found a list, a piece of paper, where it says what was issued to soldiers coming in from America.

Q. Is that to be found in tab 88?

A. Yes, it is, because it says, "For soldiers from America." It's a notebook and it says, "For soldiers from America."

Q. Yes. And then we have it written in hand, the handwritten list, and then we have the translation typed out on a typewriter; is that right?

A. Yes.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... this and the previous exhibit to know where they come from. I can always deal with it in cross-examination but the earlier the better, as far as I'm concerned. Translation --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, where does this order come from, this 161st Brigade ⁴⁵⁰⁴⁵ in tab 87 that you commented on a moment ago and this handwritten list for soldiers from America?

A. From the staff of the 161st Brigade of the KLA in Jezerce. It was seized during the last anti-terrorist operation in 1999 and handed over to the staff and headquarters of MUP or, rather, the state security department from which it was obtained pursuant to a request made by your legal associates - Momo Raicevic, in actual fact - along with some more documents that have not been attached here.

Q. All right. Fine.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now I should like to tender tabs 87 and 88 into evidence, please, Mr. Robinson?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they are admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute.

MR. NICE: There is no translation of 87, of course.

JUDGE ROBINSON: There is no translation of 87, so that is marked for identification.

JUDGE BONOMY: I have a translation of 87. There's no translation of 88, and I don't think the witness dealt with the provenance of 88 either.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let us return to 88, Mr. Milosevic. Elicit from the witness evidence about the provenance of that document.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Now, have I understood that properly? Tab 87 has a translation, and it has been exhibited, is ⁴⁵⁰⁴⁶ that it?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Fine. And that's the one where we see the order to position soldiers on hilltops, expecting an air drop. Now, tab 88, written in handwriting, is a document written for soldiers from America.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Where did you get that piece of paper from?

A. This was found in notebook 13, as it says here in the translation. It says in notebook 13, and it was seized during the anti-terrorist organisation from the staff headquarters in 1999 and sent to the state security department.

Q. Where was the document found?

A. In Jezerce, the staff of the 161st Brigade in Jezerce.

Q. Was there an anti-terrorist operation launched then when this was seized?

A. Yes, that's right.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Will that do, Mr. Robinson?

JUDGE BONOMY: It's meaningless at the moment. I don't know what it is.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Can he take it any further, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the core of the matter is that this document pertains to soldiers from America, and further on it says what was being provided in terms of what they needed; salt, cigarettes, tins, blankets, sponges, and so on and so forth. ⁴⁵⁰⁴⁷

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Forty cartons of cigarettes, 55 kilogrammes of salt, ten kilogrammes of sugar, five litres of oil, eight --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. There's 15 items, 15 different items, supplies needed by soldiers from America.

JUDGE KWON: The first page, which is typewritten, is a different document from the second page, which is in handwriting, and I don't see anything in this document which says these are part of seized documents.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, the original seized document is handwritten, and it includes only the page that pertains to soldiers from America. The rest was not included pertaining to soldiers, as they call them, from other groups. So as far as the original document is concerned, only that page has been included, the page that pertains to the soldiers from America. And in the translation it only says what is included as a whole in that list. So it is not a verbatim translation of everything that is written on that page. It's just a summary, sort of, of what the original page says, and it pertains to soldiers from America only.

The point of introducing this document is the fact that soldiers came from America and what they got for them. We're not interested in the rest, really.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Higgins, is there a basis for the admission of this?

MS. HIGGINS: Your Honour, it's very difficult to say without ^{45048 BLANK PAGE 45049} there being, of course, a translation to work out the difference between the two documents. Perhaps the best course would be to mark it for identification until we're able to see the meaning of the document. Clearly, if it pertains to supplies being given to Americans and if there is on the face of the document, we know the witness says it was seized from an anti-terrorist operation, it may well be that it's relevant. It's hard to say at this stage. I would submit that it should be marked for identification pending translation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Yes, we'll mark it for identification pending translation.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, since you spent your entire career in Kosovo, can you tell us in one sentence only, please, if possible, what was the basic objective of the terrorists over all those years?

A. The basic objective of the terrorists --

MR. NICE: As I listened to the last compendious question, it rather looks like the flourish that Your Honour, His Honour Judge Robinson, sees as the herald of the conclusion of examination-in-chief, and I think probably a fairly offensive type of question.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. I missed it. Mr. Milosevic, I'm not allowing that question it's -- [Microphone not activated] -- relevant.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. All right. If it's not relevant, if the general question will not do, then I'll put it very specifically.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁰

Q. Mr. Janicevic, please look at tab 89. What does tab 89 contain?

A. Tab 89 contains a military oath of the terrorists.

Q. All right. And what does this military oath say? You have the translation.

A. It says, "Military oath."

Q. All right. Name, father's name, et cetera. And then what does it say? "As a member of the KLA ..."

A. "... I swear that I will fight for the liberation of the occupied Albanian lands and their unification --"

Q. All right.

A. "-- that I will always be a devoted fighter --"

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, if there is a specific question, then put it, but we have the oath translated here.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I put the specific question of what the objective of the terrorists was, based on the experience of Mr. Janicevic who spent his entire career there. Here in the oath, it says to liberate occupied Albanian lands and to unify them. So I'm asking Mr. Janicevic:

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What kind of occupied Albanian lands does this actually refer to, Mr. Janicevic?

A. These are no occupied lands. This is specifically Kosovo, Macedonia, Western Macedonia, Northern Greece, and part of Montenegro, which, according to the plans dating to the Prizren League in 1878, are territories that Albanians aspire to take or, rather, to create a Greater ⁴⁵⁰⁵¹ Albania in the area. Ethnically pure.

Q. All right. That's as far as the Serbs are concerned. And what was their objective vis-a-vis their own countrymen?

A. Their own countrymen? Those who did not support their ideas did not belong to Kosovo, or could not stay alive, for that matter.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... seems to be a general point and not based on this document. I'm not sure upon what it is based. It's a matter for the Court whether they want to hear the answer.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we have the oath here and it shows us the general aims and aspirations of the KLA. It doesn't seem to me that this witness can take it any further.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's what I wanted to do, to ask for it to be admitted into evidence. The question I put to him just now has to do with the next document that is contained in tab 90. Mr. Robinson, have you admitted the previous document, document 89?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, military oath.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What is contained in tab 90? Are Albanians referred to here or Serbs?

A. Albanians only.

Q. Please read the second paragraph. It is the Main Staff of the Liberation Army of Kosovo, headed by --

A. The Main Staff of the KLA, headed by Mr. Jakup Krasniqi stated ⁴⁵⁰⁵² that an investigation should be carried out concerning three persons. The first is Ramadan Sermagja.

Q. Is he an Albanian?

A. Yes. He is a member of the state security.

Q. All right. You don't have to read on. And who is this next one, Ruzhdi Krasniqi?

A. Also an Albanian who allegedly reported that a countryman of his possessed a revolver.

Q. And the third one on that page?

A. The third one is also an Albanian, Sinan Lakna.

Q. All right.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this please be admitted as well? Admitted into evidence, I mean.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What's the relevance of this and the source?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What's the source of this document, Mr. Janicevic?

A. The source is the same as for the previous documents that were in the Albanian language; that is to say, it was found after an anti-terrorist action in Jezerce at the KLA headquarters there in 1999. It was submitted to the state security sector, and at the request of your legal associates, it was received from them.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance lies in the fact that this is just one of the many documents that are evidence of the fact that the KLA terrorised the Albanian population itself.

JUDGE BONOMY: Can you tell me the date of the anti-terrorist ⁴⁵⁰⁵³ operation at Jezerce?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot remember the exact date, but it was towards the end of April, 1999.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, until when did you stay in Kosovo and Metohija?

A. The 15th of June, 1999.

Q. Tell us as briefly as possible what the security situation was in Kosovo and Metohija when KFOR and UNMIK arrived.

A. KFOR entered while I was still there, the 12th of June, and then a hunt against the Serbs and the Roma and all other non-Albanians started. They were killed in streets, thrown out of their homes. Quite literally expelled from their homes. According to the official statistics, over 40.000 Serb houses were torched, razed to the ground. Fifteen thousand houses and apartments were taken by Albanians while their rightful owners are suffering in refugee centres in Serbia and elsewhere. Over 3.000 non-Albanians were kidnapped and killed. Those who were killed are still missing persons. Even their graves cannot be found. Only in the territory of Urosevac, which at the end of the war had about 2.510 houses, 3.210 [as interpreted] houses were razed to the ground. There were 450 Serb apartments. One apartment was torched, and all the others were usurped like the houses that I referred to a few moments ago, because they were not destroyed as they were good for living.

JUDGE BONOMY: You mentioned -- you mentioned official statistics ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁴ there. Where can we find these?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Belgrade, at the official statistics office.

JUDGE BONOMY: You mean they're not in your binders? No. All right.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not in these binders.

JUDGE BONOMY: Over what period are you saying these events occurred?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The period from the 12th of June, 1999, onwards. Practically until the present day.

JUDGE BONOMY: So you're talking about a long period of time. Thank you. Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Such things are going on even today.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. This destruction of houses and killing and kidnapping, how much of this happened immediately after the protection force of the UN came, so under their auspices?

A. Ninety-nine per cent.

Q. All right. What is the document contained in tab 91?

A. The document contained in tab 91 is one of the largest Orthodox cemeteries where unidentified Serbs were buried in Kosovo and Metohija. It is in Dulje. Dulje is an elevation between Suva Reka and Stimlje. On this locality, the members of the multinational force buried unidentified Serbs who were found by the road, in ditches, in houses, and other places. The members of the multinational forces found them. ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁵ In addition to this cemetery, in the area of Pristina at Dragovdan there is another such cemetery with unidentified persons, mostly of Serb ethnicity, and about 400 persons were buried there, about 400 bodies.

Q. When you said Orthodox cemetery, you meant to say that this is the place where 820 Serbs were buried?

A. That's right.

Q. It's not really a cemetery.

A. It's not a proper cemetery, a graveyard with any religious markings.

Q. Do you have these photographs in colour, or can we only see these black and white ones?

A. I'm not sure.

Q. Mr. Janicevic, since you're a career policeman and you were chief of the Urosevac SUP for many years, and since I assume that you still follow events in Kosovo and Metohija, could you compare the crime rates before and after the arrival of KFOR?

A. I'll try to respond, but let me just try to find something, please.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, what's the relevance of that?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance is that this fully refutes the accusations levelled here or, rather, written by who knows who, namely that during the rule of Serbia in Kosovo the population was mistreated, killed, et cetera. More people lost their lives after the arrival of the protection force than in several decades before that, in all forms of violence in Kosovo and Metohija, and this all pertains to the ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁶ time when there is not a single soldier or policeman from Serbia there.

MR. NICE: I don't know if the Court's looking for me. It seems wholly irrelevant to me, but I know the Court's generous in its approach to the Defence evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I'm not allowing that question. And if you don't have any more questions, you should just stop and let us move on, get on with the case. Generally, you utilise the last part of your examination to make certain points which are not forensic. If you are finished, then you're finished, and let us begin the cross-examination.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, among other things, this shows that if this were really a Court, and if this were really a Prosecution, somebody else should be on trial here.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I've cut you off. So conclude your examination-in-chief if you have no further questions to put.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Janicevic, thank you for testifying. I have no further questions.

A. Thank you, too, Mr. President.

JUDGE KWON: We skipped tab 66. We have to consider what to do with that tab. And I remember we haven't dealt with tab 76 and 78. In tab 76, Mr. Milosevic, the accused, showed us two video clips which he said he didn't intend to show us, and so we'll not admit 76, but I'm minded to admit 77 and 78. And 77 is not translated, so we'll mark it for identification. ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁷ The remaining matter would be tab 66.

Upon Chamber's recommendation, we skipped over those tabs and we went directly to the Racak event, and I recommended the accused to come back to those tabs if necessary.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As for 78, I thought it was admitted.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. 78.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And the rest until the end, until the end of the last binder. Thank you.

And as for 65 and 66, I am grateful to Mr. Kwon for reminding me. There is a number of exhibits inside that have been partially admitted, and you will find the references attached. The purpose of tendering these is to have admitted the documents that haven't been admitted yet and originate from the Urosevac SUP that was headed by Colonel Janicevic at the relevant time. It is on these documents that certain assessments, conclusions and initiatives were based that led to specific measures and actions to combat terrorism in Kosovo and Metohija.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, any observations?

MR. NICE: 65 and 66, aren't these the ones that appear --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

MR. NICE: Are these the ones that are largely duplicative of material we've received elsewhere? I've made my objections about the generality of producing material -- producing that material through other witnesses, but given the position we're in, I would have thought it probably sensible to have, as it were, the full set and you can make what ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁸ you can of it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I only wish to check one more thing, because we skipped over certain documents since you insisted, or Mr. Kwon insisted. I want to make sure that tab 67, which is a request of the Malopoljce company of that brigade, the KLA, and the following analysis of security related events that preceded the action in Racak were admitted, tabs 67 and 68. I can't see from my notes whether these have been admitted or not.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let me just deal with 66. Ms. Higgins had produced a tabulation, 17 documents which have not yet been admitted in evidence. We'll admit those documents. However, those that are not translated are marked for identification pending translation. This same ruling is given in relation to tab 65, that is to say the eight documents identified by Ms. Higgins will be admitted, but those that are not translated will be marked for identification.

JUDGE KWON: And I don't think Mr. Milosevic dealt with 67 and 68. Correct me if I'm wrong.

MS. HIGGINS: That is correct, according to my records where 67, 68, and I think also 69 were not dealt with by Mr. Milosevic. There is one point arising, Your Honours, which is, from my records, tab 51 had not been ruled upon. Again, I stand to be corrected. You may recall that this was a document, again a Ministry of the Interior document which was a Jasovic document, and concern was raised by His ⁴⁵⁰⁵⁹ Honour Judge Bonomy about the date, which was the 28th of May, 2004, that it in fact relates to events in Kacanik on the 5th of April, 1999. It falls again within the category of the criminal reports that have been admitted to date.

JUDGE KWON: Was it not admitted?

MS. HIGGINS: My record is it was not dealt with. I have the --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE KWON: I think it was dealt with. Yes, it was.

MS. HIGGINS: I'm grateful.

JUDGE KWON: Yes, it was admitted.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have dealt with the admission of all the documents produced in examination-in-chief.

What's the point about 67 and 68?

JUDGE KWON: 68 is an already exhibited document in D299, so there is no use to be limited again. And the only remaining is tab 67, if you'd like to deal with it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I skipped those documents because you insisted that I move on to specific matters, but I had originally intended to ask the witness about the contents of these documents and to give us a brief comment as to whether it fitted with their information about KLA activity from the relevant time. This is a document from the 28th of December, 1998, only 20 days or so before the anti-terrorist operation in Racak, and it refers precisely to the activity of the 161st Brigade that was active in the area.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, put very briefly, then, the ⁴⁵⁰⁶⁰ questions you wanted to put on 67 -- 67.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you have this document, 67?

JUDGE KWON: It is the first document in binder 4, if you have the same format.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What is this document about?

A. This is a request to the 161st Brigade, the Malopoljce company, to rally some workers and to have them report to the commander of the company to perform certain works.

Q. Is this relevant to the Racak area?

A. Precisely. Malopoljce, Racak, and Rance are all in the same brigade.

Q. So Malopoljce, Racak, and Rance are all one whole?

A. Correct.

Q. The digging of trenches, communicating trenches and bunkers, can that be qualified as a military or a civilian activity on the part of the KLA?

A. Military, of course.

Q. Did you know that trenches, communicating trenches, and bunkers were dug in Malopoljce, Racak, Petrovo village, and Rance, and did you take that into account when deciding to carry out an anti-terrorist operation?

A. Of course we did.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this document ⁴⁵⁰⁶¹ testifying to the military activities of the KLA in the area of Racak in tab 67.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Janicevic, where was this document recovered?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Also in Jezerce after the anti-terrorist operation. In April, 1999.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We'll mark it for identification pending translation.

Before we adjourn, I wanted to clarify, Mr. Milosevic, that the -- whenever I make remarks about the manner in which you present your case, I am not to be understood as suggesting that there is any burden on you to do anything. The burden remains at all times on the Prosecution. And it's a very relevant and important legal issue. For example, in relation to the question of deportation and flights from particular villages, if there is evidence that NATO bombed Village A and there is an allegation in the indictment that people fled from Village A because of Serb crimes committed on them, then in my view the specific evidence which has been led of NATO bombing on Village A could very well give rise to the inference that the flights were due to the bombing. And if that inference is of the same weight as the inference that the flights were due to Serb violence, then the burden of proof being on the Prosecution would, in my view, mean that that burden has not been discharged because the inferences are of equal weight.

So it's a very important legal issue. And if you would concentrate specifically in relation to NATO bombing, I think, on showing where the bombing was, then I think your case -- your case would be ⁴⁵⁰⁶² strengthened. So don't just rely on mass bombing but show that there was a bombing in relation to a specific village in relation to which there is an allegation of deportation due to Serb violence, and then a question may be raised as to whether the Prosecution has discharged its onus in relation to that particular allegation.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12:21 p.m.

--- Upon resuming at 12:45 p.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice. Cross-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. Mr. Janicevic, you've been a policeman for many years. Do you regard yourself as essentially a professional policeman?

A. Yes.

Q. Being a policeman is your principal or was your principal function in life?

A. Yes, principal function in life.

Q. Did you have any other major functions?

A. Yes.

Q. Perhaps you'd tell us what they were.

A. I was the president of the municipality in Strpce from the 15th of July, 1992, in fact, until the 15th of July, 1995. And I was a popular deputy in the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia.

Q. You were a member of the Serbian parliament. And just remind us, please, which party you were a member of. ⁴⁵⁰⁶³

A. The Socialist Party of Serbia.

Q. That's the accused's party. And what years were you a member of parliament for his interest in the parliament?

A. I represented the interests of the people who elected me, that's all. My electoral basis was Kosovo and Metohija of the Urosevac, Kacanik, Strpce, and Stimlje municipalities. I was a deputy from 1993, January, to about the year 2000, I think October 2000.

Q. So although you hadn't told us about this, you were actually a politician for the totality of the period of the Kosovo crisis, yes?

A. Not true.

Q. Sorry, is to be a member of parliament not to be a politician? It's different in your country?

A. No, that doesn't mean that you're a politician. That doesn't mean that you're a politician, no.

Q. You went to the parliament and you took part in the votes. Do they have discussions in your parliament?

A. Yes, there are discussions.

Q. Did they have votes in your parliament?

A. Of course there's voting, just like in any parliament.

Q. So you're elected by some people to represent their interests at a parliament where discussions are held and votes taken. Doesn't that make you a politician?

A. Partially, yes, but not wholly. Not in any substantial way, because professionally I was a policeman. Professionally, I was a policeman. I was president of the Assembly while I held that function, ^{45064 BLANK PAGE 45065} but everything else was volunteer work. I worked in the interests of the citizens who had elected me.

Q. And --

A. Is that anything bad?

JUDGE ROBINSON: You were a member of parliament while you were also a policeman. I just want to know as a matter of fact.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just at one period of time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: How many years?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Four years.

MR. NICE:

Q. That's the four years from 1995, is it, until 1999, when you left Kosovo?

A. Yes.

Q. And of course during your seven years as a deputy for the party of which this accused was the leader, you got to know him personally, didn't you?

A. I met him just once.

Q. And was it by any chance -- was it just oversight that you didn't tell us about this part of your history when you told us about your background?

A. No.

Q. I'm --

A. No, it's not true that I didn't state it. I said that I was a popular deputy, a national deputy. I apologise. Perhaps you didn't hear when I said it. ⁴⁵⁰⁶⁶

Q. Perhaps we didn't understand it.

JUDGE BONOMY: I certainly have no recollection of picking that up.

MR. NICE:

Q. Now, as a professional policeman, and as you explained you were, did you go on training courses anywhere around the world to look at other police forces?

A. I completed secondary school for internal affairs in Sremska Kamenica and that school dealt with the training and equipping a policeman. I graduated in 1971, began working on the 1st of July, 1971 in the provisional secretariat in Pristina at that time, and I worked -- I was in Pristina until the 1st of January, 1972. From the 1st of January, 1972, until the 15th or, rather, the 1st of July, 1992, I did various jobs in the Secretariat of the Interior in Urosevac. I was a policeman, a deputy commander, a chief of police station, an inspector for crime prevention, an inspector for general crime, head of the department for general crime, and so on. Deputy commander of the 6th Battalion of special police units at that time that were under establishment. I was a policeman in the Strpce municipality, leader of the sector, so I went through all the different police jobs and assignments. I have answered.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... courses anywhere around the world to look at any other police forces?

A. Not around the world, no.

Q. You see -- ⁴⁵⁰⁶⁷

A. Nobody went. None of us went around the world.

Q. I'm only interested in this period really, 1995 to 1999, and I just want a very general answer at the moment. Do you think the police station at Urosevac, where you were in charge, met the highest standards of police service in the Western world, or do you think it fell short in any way?

A. Well, what I can tell you is this: Depending from which angle of vision you look at it, in some areas we were head of the countries of Western Europe. In other respects, we lagged behind, depending on what you're looking at.

Q. Tell us about lagging behind. You know what we're concerned with, and we'll come to it later in my questioning of you if there's time, but in terms of lagging behind, did lagging behind involve the using violence on people when they were in police custody? Tell us, please.

A. That was never resorted to, at least not while I was head of SUP and an inspector.

Q. Of course, Mr. Janicevic, as the boss between 1995 and 1999, any allegations of violence, any practices of violence, any public condemnation of the police station for violence would, of course, be something that would concern you greatly, wouldn't it?

A. I didn't understand your question. Could you repeat that, please.

Q. If in the period 1995 to 1999 there was any allegations that violence was practised at your police station, if there was any public - that's written - condemnation of your police station for being a place where violence occurred, that would concern you, as the boss, very much, ⁴⁵⁰⁶⁸ wouldn't it?

A. Well, of course it would be of concern and certain measures would be taken. Quite certainly we did that. And in individual cases there were abuses and overstepping authority by policemen and persons in authority, and then legal measures were resorted to. Many were let go or dismissed as a result.

Q. Are you now saying that there were practices in your police station that were unacceptable?

A. Well, that's what I said during the examination-in-chief, that there were such instances and that measures were taken to prosecute the people behaving in unlawful ways.

Q. Anybody ever prosecuted for beating up a prisoner or torturing a prisoner or electrocuting a prisoner or anything like that? Not a prisoner, a person detained.

A. I don't know where you got that from. I don't have that information that somebody in my police station beat somebody using electrocuting methods or things like that. It's just not true.

Q. All right. Finally on this topic at this stage: It's a big police station, we've seen a picture of it, but do you think that you had a good working knowledge of what was going on in your police station, or do you think there was a possibility that there were rogue elements in your police station that could do things without your knowing what they were up to?

A. I certainly did have knowledge. Had anything happened untoward in the police station, I would have been informed. ⁴⁵⁰⁶⁹

Q. Let's turn now, then, please, to your exhibit tab 70. I've got --

JUDGE BONOMY: Before you do that, Mr. Nice. Mr. Janicevic, how much of your time was taken up by being a member of parliament?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not much. Two or three days a month at the maximum.

JUDGE BONOMY: And were you paid for that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Never.

JUDGE BONOMY: And --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My place of work was the Ministry of the Interior, and that's what I received a salary for.

JUDGE BONOMY: And did that apply to all members of the Serb Assembly, that they didn't receive any payment for that service?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. There were certain deputies who worked permanently in the Assembly, and they received salaries and had all rights pertaining to their job there.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't quite understand. So how did the deputies live? I mean, did they have other jobs, like you did, if they were not paid a salary for being a member of parliament?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A part of the members of parliament that didn't have a permanent job elsewhere in another institution or company did receive salaries in parliament, and then they were permanent working members there. Those who had permanent jobs outside parliament or the Assembly had their professional vocation, and they received salaries ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁰ where they were permanently employed.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So if you didn't have a job elsewhere, then you would receive a salary as a member of parliament.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

MR. NICE: Thank you. Can we look at -- can we just look at these maps, tab 70, please.

Now, Your Honours will recall that I was the fortunate recipient of colour versions last week. It looks as though the Chamber may have got colour versions itself, or has it not? Has the Chamber got colour versions?

JUDGE KWON: Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I have those, yes.

MR. NICE:

Q. On what date, Mr. Janicevic, were these maps prepared?

A. These maps were prepared the day before I left for The Hague.

Q. Uh-huh. What date was that?

A. In preparation for this trial.

Q. What date was that?

A. I think it was a Sunday, or perhaps Saturday.

Q. Two weeks ago, one week ago, three weeks ago? Give us a clue.

A. Three weeks ago.

Q. Three weeks ago on a Sunday or the previous Saturday or Friday these maps were prepared. Who drew them?

A. I said last time: The commander of the company.

Q. What you actually said was that they were prepared -- at least, ⁴⁵⁰⁷¹ this is what you said in English, you said that the maps were prepared in cooperation with Milan Lecic, but I actually want you to be a little more precise for us if you'd be so good.

Shall we go back right to the beginning of these maps. Whose idea was it to prepare the maps?

A. How do you mean whose idea?

Q. I thought it was quite a simple question, Mr. Janicevic, but if you'd like, I'll break it down. Which person decided to prepare the maps?

A. In preparation for this trial, I talked to the company commander and the subject was anti-terrorist action in Racak, and I asked him to make me a dynamic overview or schematic of the whole operation from start to finish.

Q. And he prepared these maps in response to that; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. So the answer to my very simple question whose idea was it, it was your idea.

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Well, now, you're not a lawyer, are you?

A. No, I'm not.

Q. And have you been following the case in detail or have you been allowing it to have its long life on its own and not been bothering to follow it? What of that, which?

A. From time to time.

Q. So -- but not very much?

A. As much as was needed, not too much. As much as necessary. ⁴⁵⁰⁷²

Q. So you said to Lecic -- well, let's again take our time, shall we? Who put you together with Lecic? Or let me ask the question in another simpler way: Whose idea was it that you should meet Lecic?

A. My idea to meet Lecic.

Q. So your idea to meet Lecic. Your idea to produce a dynamic map. And what gave you the -- what made you think it would be a good idea to have a dynamic map?

A. For a simple reason: To remind me of the events that took place more than six years ago, a full six years ago. And six years is quite a long period of time.

Q. To remind you, why, because you couldn't remember, and you needed someone to help you? Is that what you mean by "to remind me"?

A. Well, no, that's not it.

Q. Well, pause again.

A. That's not what I meant.

Q. If you could remember, you could have drawn your own map, couldn't you?

A. I couldn't because I'm not a professional in map drawing. That's one point. And secondly, I wasn't in all the segments of anti-terrorist operations. I wasn't included in all the segments, and so I wasn't -- I didn't remember all of these events. And during the examination-in-chief, I said that I did all this on the basis of the reports that would come in to me from the terrain, from the field, from responsible people in the field.

Q. So if we look at the first map, 0300 to 0830, have you got that ⁴⁵⁰⁷³ one in front of you? We can't actually tell which bits of these blue, pale blue, and red lines are your memory and which bits are Lecic's memory, can we? We just don't know.

A. Both parts are both mine and Lecic's.

Q. I'm sorry, that's lost on me and of course I don't have the code to help me. But let's just look at a little bit of this, shall we? Let's look at -- do you see the left hand, the middle of the page towards the left, with the pale blue and the dark blue curves that look as though they're sort of eyebrows, really, there are four of them. Do you see those four, pale blue and dark blue, pointing towards the right roughly? Do you see those four?

A. Yes.

Q. Before Lecic spoke to you, would you have been able to draw the top one of those four?

A. You mean this circle around Racak or the four curves at the bottom?

Q. I'll hold it up and you can see what I'm pointing to if your length of vision is satisfactory. Do you see that one there, that little one? I'm making it easy. I just want to go for a little point and see are you -- Somebody's drawn and you've produced a blue, two blue lines pointing to the right, and I just wanted to know if this is your memory, if you could have done this all on your own, or if this is Lecic's memory. Help us, please.

A. On the basis of both my memory and Lecic's memory.

Q. So this is a joint one, is it, two lines and both of you could do ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁴ it. Is that right?

A. I'm telling you I didn't do the lines. Lecic did the lines, but on the basis of memory, where the lines should be placed and where they should have been. They represent trenches in which the terrorists were located until 0630 hours. They're not ordinary lines.

Q. Give us a picture of the preparation. You see, this map is going to be very important for the Court and we need to know all we can about it. Give us a picture the two of you the day before you came here. Are you sitting at a desk with Lecic, just of two of you, and he's saying, I think the line was here, and you're saying sort of there but slightly more to the right, or did you draw a line and he agreed? Just sort of give us a picture of how this map came to be drawn, Mr. Janicevic. So perhaps was somebody else there. There may have been a professional map drawer, or a legal associate, or a clerk.

A. Please. Just a moment. I said and I claim again, I don't know how to draw maps. Milan Lecic drew the map and I was with him. On the basis of the chronological sequence of events, the time line in Racak, that's how we drew up the map, and based on our recollections of the events or, rather, the recollection of the event that took place on the 15th of January.

Q. Uh-huh. All right. Well, can you give us -- I don't -- my last question on this little detail: Can you give us the picture? Can you describe to us if it's Lecic sitting there drawing it or if it's a clerk drawing it and you describing what happened, saying, oh, yes, there were some trenches there? What is it? Just help us. ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁵

A. Lecic said, since I didn't have occasion to see the trenches over there.

Q. He said this is where they were, and you said, "All right." Is that it?

A. Of course that's it.

Q. Very well. Now, before we -- I want you to stay with this map because there's something I want to ask you about it and the other maps in just a second, but you told us about a fire at Pristina police station, I think, where some documents disappeared. Was any one of those documents a document of materiality, of significance, so far as Racak is concerned, that had been prepared by you?

A. Do you mean did a document have material importance for Racak which I prepared? Is that what you're asking?

Q. Uh-huh, and went up in the flames.

A. It's like this, you see: All the documents linked to the anti-terrorism in Racak and the anti-terrorist operation in Racak were sent on to the MUP staff or, rather, was sent on by the MUP staff because a request was made from the commission to establish what had actually happened in Racak, and one example of that set of documents was also sent to the public prosecutor, to the district public prosecutor. Now, I can't remember all the documents in that set of documents. However, it was certainly relevant documentation which pertained to what actually happened that day, from the minutes of the on-site investigation, the photographic material, the Official Notes and reports, the various other reports, and everything else necessary to substantiate evidence for ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁶ the anti-terrorist action.

Q. Let's break that answer down into a few little bits. You kept no copy of the documents you sent on?

JUDGE BONOMY: Did you not want an answer to -- I thought the question was whether any documents that this witness personally had prepared.

MR. NICE: That's the question and I'm grateful. Your Honour is quite right, I should have pressed for it now. I probably was going to come back to it.

Q. You heard Judge Bonomy's reminder. Could you answer the question: Was a document of significance for Racak that you prepared one of those that went up in flames?

A. Just part of the documents were created with this time line of the events in Racak. I prepared that personally. The rest were prepared by the employees of the secretariat.

JUDGE BONOMY: I have a separate question, unless you're pursuing that.

MR. NICE: No, no, Your Honour.

JUDGE BONOMY: Are you saying also, Mr. Janicevic, that a copy of all the documents that you had relating to Racak was also sent to the public prosecutor?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: And could now be obtained from there if -- instead of any that may have been destroyed in the police office?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do believe that they could be ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁷ obtained, but it is in the office of the public prosecutor in Pristina, district public prosecutor.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. Have any efforts been made to obtain them, these missing documents?

A. You're asking me?

Q. Yes, I'm asking you. You're the witness.

A. Well, we were not able to invest efforts of that kind because we didn't have the contacts with the people who were in the public prosecutor's office today. I talked to the district public prosecutor on one occasion, however, before I came here, a month or a month and a half before, and asked him whether there were any documents linked to Racak and all the events that took place in the area, and he said -- he told me that everything had remained in the archives of the prosecutor's office in Pristina and that he could not pull any of those documents out.

Q. So no doubt you told this piece of information to accused's legal associates and they could have been in a position to have approached the Pristina office, couldn't they? It's very easy.

A. No, I didn't say that.

Q. Well --

A. Legal associates?

Q. Let's break this question and answer down. What's the name of the person you spoke to in the office of the prosecutor in Pristina? You see, then we can speak to him ourselves. What's his name? ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁸

A. His name is Slavko Stevanovic, district public prosecutor.

Q. And the second thing is: The legal associates of this accused who were helping you prepare to give evidence could have picked up the telephone, written a letter, sent an e-mail to Mr. Stevanovic to try and get these documents, couldn't they?

A. Mr. Nice, Mr. Stevanovic is a refugee, a displaced person just like me, and he is in Krusevac. He doesn't have access to the public prosecutor's office in Pristina.

Q. Very well. In which case the associates could have picked up the telephone and contacted the people who now hold the archive in Pristina and asked for the documents, but they didn't. Would that be correct?

A. No.

Q. No? Why couldn't they have done that?

A. I don't know. I don't know why they couldn't have done that.

Q. Let's look at this first map in a little bit more detail, but before we do, back to the drawing board, as it were, back to that Saturday or Friday or whenever it was when this map's being drawn. Who is there in the office? There's you, there's Milan Lecic. Who else?

A. No one else.

Q. No one else.

A. No one else.

Q. Nobody else --

A. And it wasn't drawn in an office. It was drawn in Milan Lecic's apartment.

Q. No one else - is this right - contributed to the idea of drawing ⁴⁵⁰⁷⁹ this plan apart from you, whose idea it was, and Milan Lecic, who did the drawing?

A. That's right.

Q. Two details first of all. If you look at the big blue shape, this one you pointed to first, this one here, does that in any way come to be described as a horseshoe in either police or military terminology?

A. What I see here would be an ellipse rather than a horseshoe.

Q. Does the word "horseshoe" have a significance for you in relation to Racak?

A. No.

Q. What we can see -- I'm sorry, I think that you got a bit confused. This big blue circle was not drawn very precisely. It just shows where Racak is. The smaller circle is Luzak, and this other ellipsis is where Petrovo is. And Hadzovici mahala. The deployment of forces was depicted quite differently and marked differently, the deployment of forces in the area.

Q. It is a small point for the time being, although it may become interesting later. If we look at the -- with the map orientated north-south and if we look at the left-hand side of that big blue shape that's more like an ellipse you say - that's fine, I'm not troubled about that - it is undoubtedly all to the east of Rance, isn't it? There is no way in which that line, that westerly line of the blue ellipse passes between Rance and Luznica? Luznica is way off to the left, isn't it? Your Honours can see this on page 11 of the usual map at about 21 -- Rance is on R-20 and -- sorry, on Q-20 and Luznica is on P-20. ^{45080 BLANK PAGE 45081}

A. Luznica, Mr. Nice, has nothing to do with this case or the Racak case. Nothing whatsoever.

Q. Thank you for making it clear.

A. Because Luznica is far away from Racak. Let's not exaggerate, but about 15 kilometres. To the north at that, north of Racak. North of Racak.

Q. And would it be -- would I be right in saying that nothing of a military character happened as far west as that?

A. I am not informed of any operation that took place there. This is not the area of my secretariat. That is the SUP of Prizren. I think it's Prizren.

Q. You weren't aware of anything happening that far away, a blockade or anything of that sort?

A. Luznica?

Q. Yes.

A. No, no.

Q. I mean, the only reason I ask you, and I intended to put this off until later but I see I won't reach it otherwise until the end of -- until tomorrow, but you see, if you were to take your own D -- 1A is a tab we've looked at, you see. Let me just check what the right one is. Well, we can look at tab 5 in your own documents. That's an easier way of dealing with it. You've seen the document before, but tab 5 will do very nicely for the time being. And this is a document, I think, that if we just look towards the end of it, is signed by Bozidar Trajkovic. ⁴⁵⁰⁸²

A. Yes.

Q. And -- Your Honours, I'm sorry. The reference is incorrect in the index, and I will have to come back to that next week because I can't immediately -- I thought it was at tab 5, but -- I beg Your Honour's pardon? Not by next week, tomorrow. Tomorrow. Just give me a moment.

[Prosecution confer]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tell me what you're interested in. Perhaps I could help you.

MR. NICE:

Q. I'll show it to you and then we'll deal with it. This is a document. Would you have a look at this. It will come your way and go on the overhead projector.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, it was tab 5 in the Racak documents that were produced on an earlier occasion.

Q. This is a document, you see -- if you have a look at it, you'll see it's a document that comes from your SUP, and it's dated the 15th of January, apparently, so it's hot off the press for Racak. It appears to be signed by yourself. Is it your signature there? Or typed signature?

A. Yes, I signed it.

Q. And then if you go down to -- if you go to the -- it's also Exhibit 156, tab 16, or Exhibit 320, tab 27. I'm grateful to Ms. Dicklich for that.

If you go on the original version to, I think, the bottom of the first page or the second page, probably -- second page, I think for you, you'll see a paragraph that begins - in the English, it's towards the ⁴⁵⁰⁸³ bottom of the first page - "The horseshoe ambush was applied in the blockade and it was laid between the villages of Luznica and Rance ..." Now, that's what you wrote. You can see that, I think. Can you find that bit of text?

A. I see the text, but it is probably a typing error or a printing error. Luznica is not in the SUP of Urosevac. There's no point in mentioning it. It must be a typing error.

Q. Well, you've got it there in the Serb original, haven't you, and it does say, does it, "The horseshoe ambush was applied in the blockade and it was laid between the villages of Luznica and Rance, behind terrorist trenches"?

A. Yes, that's what it says.

Q. And you signed off on that, didn't you? Bit of a mistake, was it?

A. Not Luznica Mr. Nice. Well, I mean, it does say here that it's Luznica, but I'm telling you that it's a typing error. This is Luzak and the village of Petrovo, Petrovo Selo.

Q. All right.

A. Racak is not totally encircled. The terrorists were allowed one escape route, as is usually the case.

Q. That's why you used the word "horseshoe," yes? Give them a way out. Because you did use the word "horseshoe." You could have one mistake in a sentence, but two?

A. Please. If trenches had been dug in the shape of a horseshoe, if the trenches look like a horseshoe, and if the police goes into these trenches rather than the terrorists, is that a mistake? Can it still be ⁴⁵⁰⁸⁴ called a horseshoe? Please.

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. A horseshoe. The trenches were horseshoe shaped. You can see that on your own pictures. Yesterday I had a look at this.

Q. Mr. Janicevic, let me make something clear to you that should be clear to you as an experienced policeman. In my cross-examination, I'm going to be seeking explanation from documents that are contemporaneous, and as a policeman in charge of investigating crime, you must know that what people say at the time is always very valuable. Do you accept that?

A. Let's just clarify another thing, please.

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. I have a topographic map --

Q. I'm going to pursue you on this because you are an experienced policeman. Do you accept that what people say and what you said at the time is important? Yes or no.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, I want to know, and it's a small point, what you meant on the 15th of January when, in dealing with what had been happening generally in the area of Racak, you referred to a horseshoe ambush applied in the blockade, and it was laid behind the villages of -- forget Luznica if you say that's a mistake. I don't accept it, but if you say it -- behind the villages of something and Rance, behind terrorist trenches and connecting trenches. You're describing a horseshoe ambush by your forces.

A. Yes.

Q. Yes. Now, earlier on I asked you a question about the horseshoe ⁴⁵⁰⁸⁵ and you wouldn't accept that horseshoe was appropriate. Would you now please explain to me what you meant when you actually wrote on the day about a horseshoe?

A. I meant the Operative Pursuit Group that took the terrorist trenches that had been dug and placed in the form of a horseshoe. They were dug in such a way that from these positions practically the entire road could be fired at, and part of Stimlje too. That's really in the form of a horseshoe.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, I'm going to move on, because otherwise we'll be forever.

JUDGE BONOMY: I would like to know, before you do, where the horseshoe was located. Where is it you said the ambush was actually set up?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the terrorist trenches above Racak. In this area.

JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, could you show me that again? Now, what -- what, then, are the two villages that you meant to refer to?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Racak, of course.

JUDGE BONOMY: The document says clearly, "The horseshoe ambush was applied in the blockade and it was laid between the villages of Luznica and Rance ..." and you say that that's a mistake. So which villages did you mean to refer to?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Between Luzak and Racak.

JUDGE BONOMY: And where is Luzak? Oh, yes, I see it now. Yes. How could such a mistake be made in preparing your report? You've prided ⁴⁵⁰⁸⁶ yourself on your supreme efficiency throughout your evidence.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The mistake was only made in terms of time, in terms of the dynamics involved. All the rest is correct.

JUDGE BONOMY: But it was --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The person made a mistake.

JUDGE BONOMY: This report was written by you on the day, on the 15th of January, 1999.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You mean the mistake in this report? Well, Your Honour, typing errors do occur. The man who typed this typed this on a teleprinter, so it was directly taken off a teleprinter. There's probably some other mistake there as well.

JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. Can we go back to maps --

A. Excuse me. I haven't got the original part of the official report or the Official Note. The report that I dictated, and it was -- was retyped by the man at the teleprinter and he sent the telegram, the dispatch. So it's in the teleprinter that the mistake was made, that's for sure.

Q. And your original one, what, did it go up in smoke?

A. Well, I don't know whether it disappeared. Maybe it can be sent to you as well, like many other documents were, thousands. I didn't really look.

Q. Well, we'll look at those documents in more detail. There's another point I want to make before we close today and I'd like you to go ⁴⁵⁰⁸⁷ back, please, to the map, Mr. Lecic's flat, at the table, the map is laid out with these coloured inks and these colours pens. I'd like you to tell us, please, this: If we look at -- have you got the first map, the 0300 to 0830 map there in front of you?

A. Yes, I do have it.

Q. And we see various references there to times, and just remind us, if we look towards the bottom of the ellipse shape, we see a blue circle with a red cross, and to the left of the blue circle we see a horizontal line, 0645 underneath and 2 above. What does 2 mean?

A. This is a terrorist bunker, a terrorist observation point where two members of that terrorist brigade got killed. That's where the 2 is. And where the number 1 is was where 1 member got killed.

Q. And then to the right of that, where there's a 4, that's where 4 people got killed. And then up to the north-east where there's a -- is a -- over 715 or 716, is that a 1 or what is it there? There's another 1 there. How many people got killed there?

A. Number 1, yes. One.

Q. Whose idea was it to put this in?

A. The idea to put these numbers in?

Q. Yes.

A. Mine and Lecic's too.

Q. Lecic's. That's interesting.

A. According to the dynamic of --

Q. Has Lecic been following the trial, do you know?

A. I don't know. ⁴⁵⁰⁸⁸

Q. Did you have any input from the legal associates of the accused as to what should go on this map or was it entirely your own idea?

A. I did not get any instructions from the legal associates as to what the map should contain. The instructions I received were that the truth should be said about Racak. I have taken an oath, and I'm telling the truth. It suits someone, it doesn't suit others.

Q. Thank you for the comment but let's get on with the evidence. Let's look at that one person who died there. That's not something you could remember, is it?

A. Probably, yes.

Q. Well -- sorry. Probably? Probably you could remember?

A. Probably I didn't remember.

Q. Probably you didn't remember. Likewise the 4, probably you didn't remember. Likewise the 1, probably you didn't remember. You didn't remember any of these locations of deaths because you weren't there, were you? Were you?

A. I was not there, but on the basis of the reports that I received --

Q. Well, let's come to that in a minute because we'll deal with it in stages. There are two more maps, one of which has deaths shown on it. May we take it, but don't say yes if you're going to subsequently say no, may we take it that you could not place the position of or number of deaths on any of these maps yourself, could you, three weeks ago?

A. I could not.

Q. Thank you. You didn't have any document in your possession that ⁴⁵⁰⁸⁹ could place or give the number of deaths in the course of the ambush, did you?

A. I had a document, but I could not establish the exact localities because I was not there on the spot myself. That's why I called a man who was there.

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. Well, the reports.

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. The reports. I had the reports. After every anti-terrorist operation, those who were in charge of the operation would submit reports.

Q. Which report, tell me, would show where people died and in what numbers? Which report?

A. The on-site investigation of the investigating judge. The report of the company commander --

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. -- and the platoon commanders after the action.

Q. What about the company and the platoon --

A. What?

Q. [Previous translation continues]... Marinkovic's report --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I missed the first part of your question.

MR. NICE:

Q. Danica Marinkovic's report has not gone up in smoke. It exists. That's the investigative judge. Now, let's turn to the company and platoon commanders' reports. Where are they? ⁴⁵⁰⁹⁰

A. The reports of the platoon commanders and the company commander, as I said, were submitted to the working group attached to the MUP staff in Pristina. All the reports on the basis of which that commission made its own assessment had to do with the anti-terrorist operation in Racak. They were assessing the anti-terrorist operation in Racak and its success.

Q. Please help me. Are you saying that the platoon commander's reports and the company commander's reports showed in detail the position of these people who died, or are you saying they may have shown the positions, or don't you know? Which is it?

A. Only the places are described in terms of how many terrorists got killed in the fighting and where.

Q. So there's no map in these earlier reports, whether they've gone up in smoke or whether they're still sitting in the prosecutor's office, or whether a copy of them is in your own archives, there is no map showing the position of the dead, is there?

A. No.

Q. So when you came with Lecic --

A. There is no contemporaneous map from that time.

Q. Well, is there a later map apart from these nice, new, three-week old maps? Is there any other map that's going to show where people died, please?

A. Mr. Nice, I said that this was made three weeks ago. I said that at the very outset. I said that it was done in preparation of the trial. I never said that they were old maps. I said that it was done on the basis of the recollection of the people who were -- ⁴⁵⁰⁹¹

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. -- in charge of that, part of the people who were in charge.

Q. Is there any other earlier map, showing where people died?

A. I don't know. Perhaps you have one.

Q. From your evidence, then, it sounds, doesn't it, as though -- I think His Honour may have a question, but it sounds as though, for the position of the bodies on this map, we are dependent on your bringing Lecic's recollection. Am I right?

A. You're not right.

Q. Well, if I've missed something, apart from the fact that you're bringing Lecic's recollection drawn on this map to show where people died and in what numbers, perhaps you'd explain it for me.

A. This map and all three maps were made on the basis of the recollection of the members of the police who took part in the anti-terrorist operation. There is no other documentation.

Q. Wait a minute.

A. There is no other documentation.

Q. Very well. The police, are you saying that these maps have as an input into them more than the memory of Lecic? Was his flat populated by the two of you and some other officers sitting there, adding their comments, or was it just Lecic? Please help me.

A. Oh, please. There is no way I can help you. I told you the truth about this map. The man whose name I gave you drew the map on his own. I don't know how to draw maps. There was no one in his apartment except for him. It is certain that over the past six or seven years he talked to ⁴⁵⁰⁹² other policemen who were involved in the operation. He's the only one who is competent and who knows what happened there.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You just mentioned, Mr. Janicevic, the memory of the police, the recollection of the members of the police who took part in the anti-terrorist operation. Did you also receive information from them?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I didn't receive anything from them. I received all my information from the company commander.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, unless I didn't understand, it says here as one of your answers: "This map and all three maps were made on the basis of the recollection of the members of the police who took part in the anti-terrorist operation. There is no other documentation."

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. On the basis of the recollection of Milan Lecic, commander of the company, and the policemen who took part. He had time to talk to them and he probably did talk to them. He probably saw someone or spoke to someone, but when the map was being drawn, only he and I were present, no one else.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It was Lecic who sent you reports by radio?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: You -- you said that when you were preparing -- or when the map was being prepared, you had the investigating judge's report and the reports of the platoon commander and company commander.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was the chronology of events made contemporaneously based on reports of company commanders and platoon commanders' reports.

JUDGE BONOMY: But you had these documents in front of you at the ⁴⁵⁰⁹³ time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At what time? You mean at the time when we were doing this or in 1999?

JUDGE BONOMY: At the time when you were --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1999 --

JUDGE BONOMY: No. At the time you were preparing the maps three weeks ago, did you have the platoon commander's report and the company commander's report?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had the chronology of events.

JUDGE BONOMY: And where did you get that from?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had it in my case file. My file. It's the document that I wrote myself.

JUDGE BONOMY: Is it here? Is it one of the -- that's one of the tabs we have here. Now, what did you mean by the platoon commander's report and the company commander's report?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mentioned the reports of platoon commanders and company commanders. At the time when the chronology of events document was being drawn up, that's the document we have under one of the tabs here, it was made on the basis of platoon commanders' and company commanders' reports in 1999, on the 19th of January.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, we'll have to stop. We will adjourn and resume tomorrow morning at 9.00 a.m.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 4th day ^{45094 BLANK PAGE 45095} of October, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.