⁴⁵⁹³³

Monday, 31 October 2005

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Djosan, you remain subject to the declaration that you made. Mr. Nice has some questions to put to you.

WITNESS: MILOS DJOSAN [Recalled]

[Witness answered through interpreter] Further cross-examination by Mr. Nice:

MR. NICE: Your Honours, of course getting documents late and not having anything like the facilities to translate them in full means that we first of all guess which passages are going to be most interesting, and we've managed to get some of those translated, but I suspect I will in part inevitably be asking the witness to look at the original and to read entries from the overhead -- the text on the overhead projector. I also don't wish to take very long with this witness, if I can possibly avoid it, for many reasons.

Does the Chamber have copies of the Djosan war diary in its now complete form?

JUDGE KWON: Only in B/C/S.

MR. NICE: In B/C/S. That's fine. The pages we selected for translation, I think, can be distributed, and it amounts to some 25 pages. I think they've got the original text attached to them, but -- the numbering is slightly curious at the bottom but don't worry about that. ⁴⁵⁹³⁴ What you will have now is a clip of papers that is numbered apparently 1 of 25, but you'll see that the first sequence goes to page 12, I think, and then the next sequence starts off at -- 13, goes to 13, I think, and then it starts off at another series of 12 pages and then there are some pages behind it, but the English translations are at least chronological even if they are not sequential for every day. So that's what we've got.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one correction. Mr. Nice said that this was Djosan's war diary. This isn't Djosan's war diary, it is the war diary of the command of the 52nd Brigade of the PVO.

THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Milosevic's microphone be adjusted, please. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know whether you heard me.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, I did hear you. That's technically correct.

MR. NICE: I may also seek to refer to Delic's war diary. I don't know if the Court has access to that at all. If the Court doesn't have access to Delic's war diary, we'll just have to make that available on the overhead projector.

I'll just try and activate once more on part of my system. If it doesn't work, I'll live without it. It doesn't seem to be working.

Q. Mr. Djosan, the process of recording events in war diaries and the hierarchy of command is such that, in general, what appears in your war diary should be consistent with what appears in Delic's war diary. Would you accept that?

A. I didn't understand your question, but I'd like to say something ⁴⁵⁹³⁵ before I go ahead to answer any of the questions. I'd like to have my map placed here, the one that I brought in last time, because I think that any discussion without a map on the board would be incomplete.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let us see whether you really need it. But in the meantime, it will be at hand and the court deputy will bear that in mind.

MR. NICE:

Q. I want to -- I'm going to start with a very simple topic that you may not have been asked to deal with very much, and it's --

MR. NICE: Oh, Your Honours, may I be assured that the other witness, whose evidence has been interrupted, is not -- doesn't have access to the broadcast of this material at this moment. I'm sure that is the position, but it would be important that he shouldn't have access to it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'll ask the court deputy to see to that.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

Q. Now, there's a -- there's a place called Nogavac. Did anything happen at Nogavac on the 1st or 2nd of April of which you were aware?

A. Specifically, I can't remember anything actually happening at that point in time, but there's another map. May I please ask that the other map be shown that shows this area in greater detail, the smaller map which relates to Djakovica specifically.

Q. You have no recollection of anything happening at Nogavac, which the Chamber can find just slightly to the east of Celine and just north of Velika Krusa on page 10 of the standard atlas, Exhibit 83. ⁴⁵⁹³⁶ Well, tell me this, please, Mr. Djosan - you were in charge of anti-aircraft operations - did VJ planes fly at all during the bombing of Kosovo?

A. The bombing of Kosovo started with the bombing of Yugoslavia. And when the bombing in Yugoslavia started, in the first stage the VJ planes were flying.

Q. Until when?

A. Well, until there was complete air control. But helicopters flew after that, when the need arose, to pull out the wounded, and there were medical corps helicopters flying as well, as far as I know.

Q. Until what stage do you say there was flying of this type of -- or was it throughout the bombing campaign?

A. No. Medical corps helicopters would fly from time to time during the entire operation, that is to say the aggression against our country, but fighter planes ceased to fly in those very first days when there were no resources for them to fly.

Q. You see, we may hear other evidence from other Defence witnesses, or we may have heard some already, to the effect that there was no flying, no operational flying by VJ planes, and I want you to look, please, at a passage in "As Seen, As Told," which we'll show to you I hope in the B/C/S. I'm sorry I haven't given Ms. Dicklich earlier warning of this. Right.

MR. NICE: Can you show this to the -- that to the witness and can you display on the overhead projector that.

Q. All right. Now, this is a passage from "As Seen, As Told," and ⁴⁵⁹³⁷ you've got the B/C/S version of it. We can see it on the overhead projector, and it relates to Nogavac, and on the right-hand side of the screen, we see this: "Many people remained in Nogavac, staying in burnt-out houses until on or around the 1st or 2nd of April, when Nogavac was bombed by Serbian aircraft. At first it was thought that the dropped bombs had been dropped by NATO, but one interviewee stated that he'd heard on the news that they were Serbian aircraft. More than a hundred civilians were killed and many others were injured when houses they were sheltering in were hit in this attack. Some of the houses had as many as 60 to 100 people sheltering in them. The next day, VJ and police entered the village and forced the villagers to bury the dead in a mass grave which was then covered over using a bulldozer. The villagers were then robbed and forced to leave the village."

Now, that's a summary of matters which is expressed in "As Seen, As Told." It features in the indictment, and it suggests that VJ planes were used to kill many Kosovo Albanians. Is that correct? Did that happen?

A. Well, I've given my answer with respect to that book, or my testimony with respect to the book and my opinion about what it says in that book "As Seen, As Told." First of all, I don't know who saw, and I don't know who it was who told. So I don't like having quotations from the book quoted, the origin of which I do not know.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Colonel, would you just answer the question. Did the event described by the Prosecutor take place; that is, VJ planes bombing Nogavac? ⁴⁵⁹³⁸ Mr. Nice, what paragraph in the indictment is this? I think we just found it. I think we just found it. 63(a)(i).

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course that didn't happen.

MR. NICE:

Q. So that if there was a bombing, your case, your evidence may be, although you didn't remember it earlier, that if there was a bombing at Nogavac on the 1st or 2nd of April, it must have been a bombing by NATO, yes?

A. If there was bombing, then yes, it was NATO who did the bombing.

Q. Now, you didn't remember it this morning, but tell me, if there was a bombing of the kind that we've heard of, a hundred people killed, is that something you'd expect to find recorded in a war diary, either yours or Delic's?

A. In my war diary that needn't have been recorded in view of the fact that in my war diary you will find events which are exclusively linked to Djakovica.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I'm not sure whether we've identified the correct paragraph, but I don't see where there is any allegation of a VJ plane bombing Nogavac in 63(a)(i). Or is it maybe somewhere else?

MR. NICE: It may be somewhere else or it may be that -- and I was acting on the basis -- I can tell you this: In preparation for this, I was acting on the basis of questions that the accused was asking of the witness who has been interrupted as to the detail of what was done at Nogavac. I haven't yet checked it in the indictment. I believe it to be referred in the indictment, but if I'm wrong about that, then I'll ⁴⁵⁹³⁹ withdraw that suggestion, but the evidence is still there from "As Seen, As Told," and the point that I'm exploring loses none of its validity, but I'll try and find the point in the indictment and see if there is any further reference to.

Q. Mr. Djosan, will you now please go to your diary for the 1st of April of 1999, which I'd like --

A. I haven't answered yet, Mr. Nice.

Q. Very well.

A. I haven't given you an answer. First of all, Mr. Milosevic never mentioned Nogavac at all to me. You can look through your papers. So there was nothing said by Mr. Milosevic about that, so I could not have made the entry. My memory is good, so you can, of course, check it out, but that's what I say.

Q. You see -- will you now please look at your war diary, or the war diary of your unit, for the 1st of April.

MR. NICE: Can the usher please make it -- display it on the overhead projector if Ms. Dicklich has got another copy, and if the Chamber can find it, they can find where we're looking at. It's page -- they're page numbered, I think, and it's page number 5. No. Can we put the original on the overhead projector for the witness, please, or if he's got his diary there.

We don't have, I think -- yes, we do.

Q. If you look at this passage in your diary, you'll find two things, and we do have a translation of this passage in English, but you'll see as you look through it there's absolutely no reference to Nogavac being ⁴⁵⁹⁴⁰ bombed at all. Have a look through the 1st of April and the 2nd of April, just to cover both days.

MR. NICE: Next page on the overhead projector, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'd like to answer straight away.

Q. Yes.

A. I think that there's been a completely erroneous interpretation of the role of the 52nd Artillery Battalion of the air defence unit. In my war diary I recorded entries which relate to Djakovica, to Djakovica, exclusively to Djakovica. So this area is outside Djakovica, and that is why no entry was made.

Now, my units were deployed. I had --

Q. Pause for a minute because we've got the point but I still want you to please follow with me the questions that I'm asking. Would you now look at the bottom of the page that's displayed at the moment - and the Chamber can find a translation for this on page 12 of 26, as I think it is registered - and it says this, does it not: "There were no NATO airstrikes against units of our brigade today nor any firing by our forces at NATO aircraft."

And if we look at Delic's diary, although I'm not going to trouble you with it again unless -- it says in terms that there were no attacks of any consequence on that day. And what I'd like your help with, please, by reference to the diaries is how it could be, if NATO had bombed Nogavac and killed a hundred people, that the war diaries, yours or Delic's, would make no reference to it?

A. I'll tell you right away. NATO bombed Aleksinac, and there is no ⁴⁵⁹⁴¹ entry about that in either my diary or Delic's diary. What is entered into a war diary are events which are of key importance and have a key effect on a particular unit. Had a single soldier of Delic's been killed there, that would have been entered. So as I say, not all NATO action in Djakovica was even recorded in my diary if there were no soldiers killed or facilities targeted or resources destroyed, and that is why there is no mention of that in Delic's diary.

Q. If you just go to the end of the month. If you'd go now, please, to the 30th of April, which we can see in the original B/C/S text at what is page 36, marked as the 38th day of the war. If you could do that for us, please, Mr. Djosan. In the original, page 36, top right-hand corner, also registered as "38 dan rata," and if we can -- I'm not sure that we have translation of --

JUDGE KWON: 8 of 12.

MR. NICE: 8 of 12. Your Honour is very helpful. Thank you very much.

Q. What we see there is that you were instructed, or your war diary records - I'll just find it again - "OCPRK was ordered not to shoot at targets -" this is at 0600 hours - "because our air force is in action." Now, the reality was that your air force was in action from time to time throughout the conflict, wasn't it?

A. Yes.

Q. And of course, your air force could only be in action, apart from humanitarian matters and helicopters moving wounded around, could only be in action to bomb its own people. ⁴⁵⁹⁴²

A. No. First of all, you can see that you're not well-versed in what an air force is. The effects of an air force depends on the type of planes. Fighter planes fight other planes. However, a helicopter transports. A transport plane transports. So when I say the air force, everything that flies is considered to be part of an air force. And when I said that our air force was operational, it meant that our helicopters could have flown, so that's the real answer to your question.

Q. "Our air force is in action." This is on the 30th of April. It doesn't say "Our helicopters are flying," it says "Our air force is in action." It sounds as though it's in fighting mode.

A. Aircraft and helicopters together form aviation. Both make part of an aviation. And I'm telling you the information is centralised. The alerting is centralised. And I'm telling you it could have happened that planes or helicopters were flying somewhere in the north. All our units would be informed, would be alerted at the same time. It doesn't mean at all that the helicopter was flying in Kosovo and Metohija at the time. It don't necessarily mean that.

Q. Can we go to the 16th of April, please. That we may not have a translation for. We don't have a translation for that.

MR. NICE: Could you please place, Mr. Usher, page 22 of the original, marked "24 dan rata" or -- I think it's about right, and can you place that on the overhead projector. And for 1955 hours, entry number 8.

Q. We see a reference, do we not, to reservists committing acts of rape and being taken into investigation followed by -- taken into custody and followed by investigation. Is that right? ⁴⁵⁹⁴³

A. Yes, only they were not reservists. They were regular soldiers. They were my soldiers --

Q. Why is it marked --

A. -- they were not reservists.

Q. We can see in your diary, or your unit's diary, they were marked as reservists. We can see it in the second line. So how come they got marked as reservists if the truth is it was the regular soldiers who were accused of rape?

A. Because that was just the first information we got. And when we established their identity, I went there myself when it was established that they were regular soldiers. The information came from the MUP, and the original information also came from the MUP. The reservists and soldiers were dressed the same, and that's how the original confusion came about. You have documentation about that in the form of some criminal reports that were filed.

MR. NICE: Can we look, please, at the 21st of April, which is page 27, Mr. Usher. And at the foot of the page for this, at item number 7 -- further down, please. We still don't have translations, I think, for this. We see an entry right at the foot of the page -- right down, please. Push the page right up. That's it. I want to see the bottom of the page, please. Right. You've got to go -- we still can't see the bottom of the page. Can you push it so we can see the bottom entry on the page. The other way round, please, Mr. Usher. Can you push the page up so that I can see all of entry number 7. That's it, thank you.

Q. Can you read entry number 7 to us, please, Mr. Djosan. ^{45944 BLANK PAGE 45945}

A. "21 member of the MUP was killed and seriously wounded in Meja village. The units were ordered to take measures of combat security and given tasks --" can't read this -- "information that there were 300 to 400 members of Siptar terrorist forces --"

Q. That will probably do for the present purposes. Before -- I'm going to come back to that entry, but just cast your eyes up the page, please. It's item number 2, so you'll have to move the document a little bit. Items 2 and 3. Can you just read out number 2, the 2.30 entry, please.

A. "Action of enemy aviation against refugees from Maja villages."

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness read into the microphone, please, and read again.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute, Colonel. You're being asked by the interpreter to read into the microphone. Start again.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Action of enemy aviation targeting the refugee settlement of Maja in the area of Bistrazin village. Airstrike effected with 32 projectiles of highly destructive power resulting in complete destruction of the settlement." That's here.

MR. NICE:

Q. Well, you've read that as Meja in the area of Bistrazin village. Meja is in quotation marks, is it not?

A. Maja, Maja; not Meja.

Q. Maja.

A. Maja was a name for that refugee settlement which housed refugees from Croatia, people who were expelled during the Storm and Flash ⁴⁵⁹⁴⁶ Operations. There was a Serb refugees settlement, settlement of Serbs expelled from the territory of Serbia during the Croatian offensives.

Q. So here we find two things: First of all, we find at 2.30, when NATO bombs an area, you do record it, unlike that which happened at Nogavac, as you would say. And then at the foot of the page in the entry we first looked at, we see that there is a suggestion that a large number of MUP people had been killed at Meja. Two different words. Maja, M-a-j-a, Meja the village.

So two points: First, do you record NATO bombing; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And secondly, before the operation against Meja starts at item 7 on this page, we see a recording of a large number of MUP people killed, is that right, in the Meja area?

A. To your first question, why there is this entry in the diary: Because the refugee settlement Maja is part of Djakovica. Secondly, we had our own unit in the area of Bistrazin that was guarding the Bistrazin bridge, and the airstrike could easily have been on the unit. And thirdly, Meja and Maja are completely different notions and completely different locations. The only thing they have in common are three letters.

Q. You see a few days later, a few days after this entry in your war diary, under the operation that you explained was described as Reka operation, a large number of people died at Meja. Was this another example of killings being responsive by way of revenge?

A. Mr. Nice, you're asking me questions which are really not ⁴⁵⁹⁴⁷ appropriate. I could easily ask you if the killing of that Brazilian man in London was responsive by way of revenge.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Colonel, just please answer the question if you can.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm a general, but it's all the same. You can call me "Colonel" if you wish.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thanks for the correction, General.

MR. NICE:

Q. Next page, please. Next page, please. Mr. Djosan, you have been giving an account --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Did we have an answer to the question?

MR. NICE: I've given him a chance to answer it. He's given the answer he's given. It's kind of negative. It's up to him how he answers these things.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. Carry on.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would appreciate it if you would repeat the question and I will answer.

MR. NICE:

Q. Very well.

A. No, there was no killing by way of revenge or retaliation. There was a combat against terrorists, and terrorists got killed in combat, just as my soldiers did.

Q. Very well.

A. Except that my soldiers were more often killed in ambushes and because they stepped on mines or because they were kidnapped. But nobody ⁴⁵⁹⁴⁸ was killed by way of retaliation.

Q. You've given an account of NATO bombardment, and the picture you have painted may have been of almost continuous bombardment. Would you look, please, at the next page, which is -- yes, that's the page, and read out the first entry for the 22nd of April for us.

A. "In the last 24 hours, intensive flying over by enemy aviation in the area of defence of the brigade was like in the previous days. There was no airstrike on brigade units, nor did we attack them because they were moving outside the reach of successful targeting by our weapons."

MR. NICE: Two pages further on, please. Again on the first entry. This is the -- two pages further on. 32nd -- Mr. Nort. Mr. Nort, that's the one. The 32nd day of the war.

Q. Can you read the first entry for this page, please, Mr. Djosan.

A. Yes. "Action of enemy aviation in the zone of the brigade was absent. Over-flights were effected like on the previous day. Our units did not fire because the targets were outside our zone of activity, outside our range."

MR. NICE: Next page, please, Mr. Nort. The 33rd day of the war.

Q. Please read the first entry again for us, and now I think we have -- we have translations into English to be followed.

A. "The intensity of enemy over-flights as yesterday. There were no airstrikes at the combat disposition of the units of the brigade. We did not fire at them because they flew outside the range of our weaponry.

Q. Then the last entry on this topic -- would be on the next page, please, Mr. Nort, the 34th day of the war, and it's the entry at 1900 ⁴⁵⁹⁴⁹ hours.

A. Shall I begin with the first entry?

Q. If it's relevant to this topic.

A. It seems to be.

Q. You're quite right. "Four missiles were sent into the Devet Jugovica barracks." Yes.

A. "In the earning morning hours enemy aviation intensively struck against installations in the zone of the brigade with four projectiles there fired at the Devet Jugovica barracks." That's in the centre of Djakovica, I want to add.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... but then if we go over to 1900 hours, we see again as a reflection of their level, or the strike rate of air attack --

A. "Due to bad weather and rain, the intensity of activity by enemy aviation was lower." Of course, when the weather is bad, planes don't fly so often. However, they were able to fire, to effect airstrikes regardless of the rain, in view of the tactics they were applying.

Q. So these last few entries that I've asked you to read out show that it was by no means daily attack on your area, or anything like it, was it?

A. No, that's not true. There were daily airstrikes. I'm just telling you this diary was kept in Djakovica. That was the headquarters of the brigade, and there was one artillery battalion in Bec, which is slightly further away from Djakovica. So if there were airstrikes in Prizren, they were not striking installations of the brigade. Airstrikes ⁴⁵⁹⁵⁰ were a daily occurrence. And when I say "daily occurrence," I mean by day and by night. It's just that they didn't hit one of our installations every day.

MR. NICE: The Chamber will recall, looking at the page displayed at the moment, that this is the first reference we found to the "Reka" operation. I needn't repeat that, but just to remind you, and if Mr. Nort would just display the next page and we can see in the English the 27th, now that we have it translated. There's the next reference we've been able to find to Reka at 0600 hours, where it says: "The action of --"

Q. Perhaps you'd like to read out the entry at 0600 just again so we've got the precise words that you would use, or that were used in the diary.

A. Yes. I think I read this three or four days ago.

Q. Just read that one sentence. "The action of --"

A. "The action of mopping up of Siptar terrorists forces, Reka, began in which the following forces are participating --"

Q. "Ciscenje" is the word?

A. 1 MB of the first light rocket -- yes.

Q. "Ciscenje" means -- it's been translated as "mopping up," but does it also mean "cleansing"?

A. No. "Ciscenje" means separating the good from the bad.

Q. Does it?

A. If you take it as a word. That meant separating the terrorists from the rest of the population.

Q. And we've been told by the accused that the term "ethnic ⁴⁵⁹⁵¹ cleansing" was first applied in respect of sufferings by the Serbs. Is the word "Ciscenje" used for ethnic cleansing? Help us.

A. "Ethnic cleansing" and "Ciscenje" are different things. Ethnic cleansing has now taken place in Kosovo and Metohija, and it is now ethnically really pure.

Q. I'm right, aren't I, that the phrase "ethnic cleansing" --

A. No, you're not.

Q. Perhaps you'd let me ask the question first, Mr. Djosan. The phrase "ethnic cleansing" in your language has, as one of its two words, the word "Ciscenje"; correct? Simple question.

A. [No translation]

Q. Thank you. You give your answer by your reply.

A. No, no, I did not answer the question.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I did not hear the answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please don't do that.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please give the answer. I didn't hear the answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't really answer, that's why you didn't hear me.

Ethnic cleansing is a notion that was imposed and introduced to indicate that Serbs were doing it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me give you the --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now, Serbs are completely absent from Kosovo. There are no Serbs in Kosovo.

JUDGE ROBINSON: The question that was asked was -- ⁴⁵⁹⁵²

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So that's a real ethnic cleansing.

JUDGE ROBINSON: The question that was asked was whether in your language the term "ethnic cleansing" has as one of its words "Ciscenje."

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In our language -- there are two words in our language for that and one of them is "Ciscenje." "Etnicko ciscenje" is a term that consists two of words, the last of them, the second of them being "Ciscenje."

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

MR. NICE: If we can go to the 28th of April, the Chamber will simply find again that -- putting its evidence and memory perhaps in context, a third reference to the Reka plan on the fifth line of the entry on the 28th of April, the 36th day of the war. I don't need to go through that again.

Q. Can you just tell us this, Mr. Djosan: Have you been thinking about your evidence? Has it occurred to you where we might be able to find a copy of the Reka plan?

A. First of all, plan of the Operation Reka -- first of all, it was not an operation. It was an action, an anti-terrorist action. You should distinguish between those two terms. "Operation" is a much larger notion. It implies greater forces and a larger area and takes a longer time. Second, my unit did take part in that anti-terrorist action, and I gave you an explanation. The complete plan is something that I don't have. Every unit gets the relevant excerpt for its own action. My part of the task was to defend the axis towards Cabrat. I told you that a couple of days ago. ⁴⁵⁹⁵³

Q. We have your evidence on that, and what you described it as was an assignment to prevent the grouping of Siptar terrorist forces rallying in their Carragojs valley.

A. Carragojs.

Q. Yes, I accept that. And you knew that the plan - it was your terminology - the plan was called Reka. Well, I still ask you: Do you know where we can find a copy of this plan?

A. That's something I don't know. I know about the orders I received for my unit. Each unit gets its own task, its own assignment.

Q. You see, if we look at Delic's diary for the same period, and I don't have time to with you, but if we look at Delic's diary for the same period, we will find no reference to the word "Reka." So here we have a plan of great importance and at the end of which a large number of people lay dead. Can you explain to us how such an important plan has a name - a code name - in your diary that doesn't appear as a code name in the diary or any other documentation of your superior officer?

A. Which superior officer do you mean? Who do you mean?

Q. Delic.

A. Delic was not my commander. He was not my superior officer. We were colleges. He was the commander of one brigade, and I was commander of another brigade.

Q. All right. Well, can you explain, then, how people involved in the same operation will not be using the same code term to describe it?

A. First of all, it was not an operation. It was an anti-terrorist action. In Kosovo and Metohija, a total of three anti-terrorist actions ⁴⁵⁹⁵⁴ took place during the entire aggression. One was the anti-terrorist operation in 1998. Another operation was the aggressive operation of the air force, and the third was the defensive operation of the army of Yugoslavia. There were only three operations.

Q. Now, if Lazarevic is the superior to whom you're concerned, should we be able to find reference -- is your superior. Can you -- where shall we find reference in either his records or his archives to this Reka plan, so that we can know what was really planned? And I'm using the word "planned" because, in translation, that's what you described it as a few days ago.

A. Did I say that it was called "Reka Operation" or did I say it was a plan?

JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues]... away from the argument about whether it's an operation or a plan or an action. You know what the questions are about.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was an anti-terrorist action, and it would be very wrong to say that the army of Yugoslavia undertook an operation against such small forces. An operation implies the use of forces the size of a corps or larger, and in this action a relatively small number of soldiers and policemen were involved. That cannot be an operation. An operation is defined by the forces, the time, and the area for which they fought. And if we now start saying that operations were being effected everywhere, then we would make it sound like the Second World War or something.

And as to the second part of your question about the plan of ⁴⁵⁹⁵⁵ General Lazarevic, how could I know about the plans of my superior officer, his documentation? Anyway, it's not his documentation. It's the documentation of the corps. Our superior officers do not have their own documentation. Just like Djosan's diary: It's not Djosan's diary, it's the diary of his brigade.

Q. One more question on this and then I'm going to move on because I want to finish as soon as I possibly can. If we look at Delic's diary for the same period, we'll find plans that are much broader in scope than the particular Reka plan that you were concerned with. Was there a larger plan of which Reka was an integral part; and if so, what was the name of the larger plan?

A. I'm not aware of that. My knowledge is reflected in the diary. Whatever I knew is in the diary. If I had been aware of any other plan, it would have been reflected in the diary.

Q. I can do no more than that.

MR. NICE: The Chamber may be interested, or the accused may be interested in finding, there's another reference to rapes on the 2nd of May, I think, with investigation. I mention that for completeness. I'm not going to go into it in detail.

If we can go, please, Mr. Nort, to page 41, the 44th day of the war, and to the entry at 1800. This is for -- and we -- we don't, I think, have this, unfortunately, translated, but if we look at 1800, please, Mr. Nort. Right down at the bottom of the page. We see here a reference to plan called -- or something called "Silo." Or Silo. Silo - I'm grateful - it's got a diacritic on top of ^{45956 BLANK PAGE 45957} it, I can see it now.

Q. Can you read out the sentence that ends in "Silo" so that we can see what it is all about.

A. Yes. First I'd like to say something in relation to what you said about rape. There were individual cases. Both were attempted rapes, and you do have the documentation about this. Every such individual case was prosecuted. So let's deal with that straight away. I don't want to omit referring to that kind of thing.

As for Silo, what is written here, I don't know what you're specifically interested in. Are you interested in what silo is? That is a type of a rocket system for air defence.

Q. Very well. That's what it is. I'm not concerned. I'm trying to decipher your document and to see how it may assist Chamber. Let's move on, then, please, to page 47, the 49th date of war, 12th of May. Again on the -- it's the entry at 16 -- just above 1600, Mr. Nort, please.

Here we see another reference at the end of this entry to something involving VP and then "Skore," which I think probably means Ceasar. Is this a code word? What does it mean, "Skore"?

A. No. First of all, I don't think it's "Skore." It's "Skoze." Yes, Skoze. It's an elevation where we place our rocket system in order to fire at the air force.

Q. Very well. We see, and you -- I can take you to the references, but will you accept that in the period of May you were sending to Pristina regularly for reinforcements? Is that right? ⁴⁵⁹⁵⁸

A. No, Pristina.

Q. You were sending for reinforcements to Pristina. For example, on page 52, the 54th day of the war.

MR. NICE: Please, Mr. Nort, page 52, 54th day of the war, and the entry at 1320.

Q. Here you are recording that you -- the brigade has sought reinforcements from Pristina; isn't that right?

A. That's right.

Q. Thank you. And there are other entries to the like effect. Would you accept that?

A. Well, I'd have to know what kind of reinforcement and in what sense. There can be reinforcements in different ways. We asked for air defence reinforcements because the most intensive airstrikes by NATO were at that time in Metohija parallel to the aggressor strikes coming from Albania. That is to say the stronger the terrorist attacks from Albania were, the more there were NATO airstrikes in Metohija. That is why we sought reinforcement in the terms of PDO, the air defence systems.

Q. If you go to page 53, the 55th day of the war, in this 1610 entry we can see that you were actually getting whole fresh units from Pristina, weren't you? It wasn't just -- you were actually getting more units. And just think back, please. Why did you need more units?

A. Mr. Nice, you're asking me things that you don't know about. I cannot get any kind of equipment without soldiers.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General. General, answer the question. Leave aside the comments. ⁴⁵⁹⁵⁹

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we asked for reinforcements, that meant that we were asking for an air defence unit. You cannot get equipment without getting the manpower you need. In my unit, I had the exact number of people required for manning the equipment we had. An aircraft without a pilot doesn't mean a thing. The same goes for our units. When we asked for reinforcements, we asked for a unit of the air defence to come in. That is the manpower or the personnel that you're speaking of.

MR. NICE:

Q. So I'm going to suggest to you that the whole purpose of getting reinforcements is because the plan to move the population was under way. Would you go now, please, to the 56th day of the war --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I think he must answer that.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, yes, certainly.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Answer that question.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. I don't think you're right on that at all, and I think that your line of thinking is tendentious. How could I move the population out with air defence systems? I already told you that that could have happened only if they were on aircraft.

MR. NICE:

Q. 56th day of the war, please --

JUDGE BONOMY: Perhaps I misunderstood, but I thought your immediately preceding answer was to the effect that you can't work the systems without men and therefore you had to have men as part of the ⁴⁵⁹⁶⁰ reinforcements. Was that not the answer?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.

JUDGE BONOMY: So what Mr. Nice is suggesting is you didn't need the men for the air defence systems, you need the men to help with the movement of the population. So why don't you deal with that question?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think that it is pointless to answer that kind of question. I have explained that air defence only operates against an aviation. So if we asked for anti-aircraft defence reinforcements, we were asking for them in order to be able to fire back. And you know that there were airstrikes every day.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. There are only three more pages that I want you to look at. 56th day of the war, then, please, the 18th of May. If we go down to the bottom of the page, at 16.30. This is the third time you get reinforcements, by my calculation, from Pristina. Perhaps you'd read that entry, just -- just the entry for 16.30.

A. Yes. "The Chief of Staff goes for the third time in succession to Pristina in order to take over the reinforcement unit and to bring it into the brigade."

Q. Very well. Now, then, we'll look at the next entry. The Chamber will --

A. No, no.

Q. I'm sorry. Will you now then -- we'll look at the next entry. The Chamber will immediately recognise the second word on the next entry. ⁴⁵⁹⁶¹ Perhaps you would be good enough to read the entry out.

A. "The action of cleaning up the terrain in the villages south-west of Cabrat, reported by AKM." That is the forward command post of the Pristina corps. Our two firing platoons were supposed to take part in it --

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. -- from the logistics part and from the other part of the brigades.

Q. Now, our interpreters have used the word "mopping up" or "cleaning up" for "Ciscenje," and we know that it features in the phrase, or is one of the words that features in the phrase "ethnic cleansing." Here, in context, cleaning up the villages to the south-west of Cabrat, that was ethnic cleansing you were engaged in, wasn't it?

A. Of course that was not the case. It was not ethnic cleansing, it was cleansing from terrorists. And the word "cleansing" or "clean-up" means separating something from the other. When you're cleaning your apartment, for instance, I imagine you leave the apartment intact, you just get the rubbish out.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Djosan, is this an example of men within your brigade being used for purposes other than air defence?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Part of the unit from time to time, at different points in time, when necessary, on orders from the superior command, took part in that. That's the unit that was called the intervention unit, and it consisted of two platoons of -- and it consisted of soldiers whose speciality was infantry. ⁴⁵⁹⁶²

MR. NICE:

Q. And that two platoons reinforced by units from Pristina on three occasions?

A. No. No. A platoon cannot receive reinforcements. Reinforcements from Pristina were received only in terms of anti-aircraft equipment as the airstrikes against our forces and the civilian population in towns was intensified. That is to say, bombing by NATO aviation. As soon as the NATO Air Force strikes stopped, these reinforcements were no longer needed.

Q. 57th day of the war, please, 19th of May.

MR. NICE: The 18.50 entry, please, Mr. Nort. Thank you very much. Immediately on the screen.

Q. Perhaps you'd like to read for us the 18.50 entry.

A. "From the IKM of the Pristina Corps we received orders that this delayed action of cleansing or cleaning up villages below Cabrat should be realised on the 20th of May and that the planned units should be at their position for departure at 5.00 in the morning."

Q. So the cleaning up, what you would say the separation, I think, of the terrorists from the good people is planned in advance with units, and it's got a start time at 5.00 the following morning; is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. So if you go to the following day, the 58th day of the war --

A. Let me just finish, please.

Q. Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, go ahead. ⁴⁵⁹⁶³

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We had our units in that area, and there were a great many terrorists there. It was necessary to provide security for our units against the terrorists.

MR. NICE:

Q. But these units that are being delayed -- put on a delayed start until 5.00 the following morning are going to do the cleaning up, cleansing, mopping up, separation, whatever it is described by the word "Ciscenje," yes?

A. Yes. My unit or, rather, part of my unit; two platoons.

Q. So let's go over, then, to page -- the 58th day of the war. The 20th of May. The 5.00 entry at the top, which is what we would expect. Read that out for us, please.

A. "Units for clearing up from our unit --"

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please read slower. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, the interpreter is asking you to read more slowly and into the microphone. Would you just read that again, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Units for clean-up from our composition, that is to say one platoon from the logistics and one platoon from the command at the ordered time should take the departing positions as they are ready to carry out the set assignment."

MR. NICE:

Q. This is the clean-up units being sent off to Cabrat, I think, is that right? ⁴⁵⁹⁶⁴

A. Yes.

Q. And then we go to 17.50 on the same page. And if there's anything significant in the middle, you must let me know about it, but if we go to 17.50 on the same page, read that entry out, please.

A. "Units that took part in clearing the terrain returned to their original units. The task was carried out successfully without any losses."

Q. So tell us, please, separating out the KLA from the others, how many people died, how many people taken prisoner, where is it all recorded?

A. My units were only in the blockade. My units did not have contact with the terrorists.

Q. Units are sent off at 5.00, as we can see, to do whatever is meant by "Ciscenje." The operation is successful --

A. Yes.

Q. -- and there have been no losses on your side. Can we find out, please, what actually happened. Were people killed? Were people arrested? Were people moved out? Which is it?

A. "Units that took part in clearing up the terrain returned to their original units. The task was successfully carried out without any losses." That is to say the task that the unit had was carried out. That means that they were on the blockade line and that they did not have any losses and that they were not engaged in any operation.

Q. You see, Mr. Djosan, we are trying to work out through the contemporaneous documents that come late to hand what happened, and I must ⁴⁵⁹⁶⁵ suggest to you that this diary of yours shows that you were actually engaged in the processes of ethnic cleansing. And the reason it doesn't find reflection in, for example, Delic's diary, these entries of yours, is because what you were doing was wrong and you all knew it.

A. That's not correct. My units are only -- or, rather, only a small part of my units that were in Djakovica were engaged from time to time in protecting primarily their own combat order; their own combat order. And every unit has the right and duty to protect the order and deployment of its own units. That is not ethnic cleansing. That was only fighting against terrorists.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, I'm grateful for the time to deal with that document. Its production as an exhibit, it may or may not be that the Chamber would prefer to put all parts of this diary together comprehensively or it may want to exhibit them separately. The translations are, of course, draft translations and I'm sorry that we weren't able to guess in advance which other pages we would -- our research has subsequently shown would find of value to you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Nice. Questioned by the Court:

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, would it have been possible to use some word other than "Ciscenje" in relation to the action you were taking against the terrorists?

A. I think that the word "Ciscenje" in a way was a clumsy choice, but it was used very often. Whoever kept the diary, the operations officer, often used it -- or, rather, this word was often used irrespective of what ⁴⁵⁹⁶⁶ was actually being done. Specifically, the word itself, "Ciscenje," really has a very broad meaning, but it was customary. It was used often, and sometimes quite simply it was used in order to record things faster, to write them down faster.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Would you just tell us again what -- what you say it means in the context in which we saw it referred to perhaps five or six times.

A. It was used -- in the concrete context, it means that this was fighting against terrorists, Siptar terrorists, in certain places where an action was being carried out. So that means that this was only fighting against terrorists who were fighting against our units, who were resisting them, et cetera. This does not mean at all that the population were the targets of the military and the police. After all, there was a witness here from Osek Hilja, from Cabrat, from that area who talked about this. My unit was in Osek Hilja all the time and there weren't any problems at all. But there were places where our units sustained major losses, especially as the aggression continued, there were more and more terrorists in urban areas.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It was only used in relation to the terrorists?

A. Terrorists only, yes. When it says "Ciscenje," it meant removing them, taking them captive, and even killing terrorists in a war. That is to say, destroying terrorists.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

A. If they could be taken prisoner, of course they were taken prisoner, but fighting went on. But it was terrorists only. ⁴⁵⁹⁶⁷

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, is there anything arising from this phase of the cross-examination that you might wish to take up in re-examination?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, just a few questions. Further re-examination by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] General, Mr. Nice quoted page 6 to you, trying to prove that it was contradictory to your statement, that every day there were bombing campaigns during the aggression. Was the bombing campaign a daily occurrence in Kosovo and Metohija?

A. Every day.

Q. On page 6, it says: "Airstrikes of NATO. There weren't any NATO airstrikes at the positions of our brigade."

A. That's right.

Q. So that there were no airstrikes relates only to the positions of your brigade?

A. The positions of my unit only. And the buildings or, rather, the positions where my units are, Cabrat, and so on and so forth.

Q. All right. Let's not waste time. On the top of that page, it says at 8.45 the air alert signal went off. What does this say here? ODH what?

A. The observation station from the Metervojnovic [phoen] barracks.

Q. All right. And then it says that NATO struck several times, the NATO Air Force.

A. Yes. ^{45968 BLANK PAGE 45969}

Q. So this day that he chose out of context, he claims that there was no activity because there weren't any airstrikes against your unit.

A. There was activity every day.

Q. Was there a single day in Kosovo when there were no NATO activities?

A. I do not recall a single day in Kosovo and Metohija without any NATO activity.

Q. At the beginning, Mr. Nice asked you about Nogavac, and you responded that at first our air force was flying. Our air force, was it flying over Kosovo and Metohija during the aggression?

A. No.

Q. When you say that it was flying, you are referring to other parts of Yugoslavia?

A. Yes.

Q. But in Kosovo they had to respect air supremacy; right?

A. Yes.

MR. NICE: That's, of course, a leading question which takes no account of the text, and it shouldn't have been asked by the accused, as he knows, because when he says, When you're referring, you're referring to other parts of Yugoslavia, the text needs to be examined to see what it says. It doesn't say that at all.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you are to avoid leading questions.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that this question was not a leading question at all. It was just a yes/no question, and he gave his ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁰ answer. So it was not a leading question at all.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Nice showed you page 22 here and said that a group of reservists was referred to here. What does it say here at 19.55 on page 22? Could I please read it out, or could you read it out?

A. I can. At 19.55: "We were informed by the MUP that a group of reservists in the village of Crmljanje are carrying out rapes and robbery. The commander ordered that --"

THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please read slower. The interpreters cannot follow.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General. General, you're being asked by the interpreters to read more slowly.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, you don't have to read the first part that you quoted when Mr. Nice said so, but in this first part, does it say, "We were informed by the MUP"? This -- is this the information that you recorded the MUP informed you?

A. Yes.

Q. And you don't know?

A. Yes.

Q. And now please read out the part that Mr. Nice didn't want you to read, that is to say the commander ordered, what Mr. Nice didn't ask you.

A. "The commander ordered -" that is to say I ordered - "that the commander of the 3rd Battalion of the PVO, who was stationed there, ⁴⁵⁹⁷¹ together with the head of the security organ and the Military Police Platoon, carry out an on-site investigation and arrest the perpetrators." So these were not reservists, they were soldiers.

Q. You established that after the investigation, but you recorded here what the MUP informed you, what you ordered. You ordered for people to go out and arrest the perpetrators. Thank you, General. Let us just have a look at this, this page that has to do with the relevant date, the 27th. That is page 33. This was often mentioned here. A few days ago you quoted this and now as well. So what does this say here? "The action of cleaning up the STS, the Siptar terrorist forces." Isn't that what it says?

A. The action of cleaning up the Siptar terrorist forces has started.

Q. All right. Thank you, General. So "Ciscenje" in relation to Siptar terrorist forces, can it pertain to anything else but to what it does pertain to, that is to say the Siptar terrorist forces?

A. That only; nothing else. That is to say, neutralising the Siptar terrorist forces.

Q. Have you ever heard of any measures of that kind being taken against the civilian population?

A. No.

Q. And was anything done to help the civilian population?

A. Yes, several times.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, you just used the word "neutralising," for "Ciscenje." That's the first time I've heard that. Can it have that meaning as well, to neutralise? ⁴⁵⁹⁷²

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I've told you a few moments ago that the word "Ciscenje" in a way became customary and sometimes for practical reasons it was used. Maybe it should have said all the time "the Ciscenje of Siptar terrorist forces," but "neutralising" could also be an adequate and appropriate word.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Page 28, which also pertains to this action Reka. It says: "Brief discussion among the command organs of the brigade where it was pointed out --" what was pointed out here? At 0700 hours. You have a meeting of your commanders.

A. I don't have that page here with me.

Q. Page 34. A few moments ago Mr. Nice showed you that page. That is the 28th. That's the date.

A. The -- page 34, the 36th day of the war?

Q. Yes. Yes.

A. "Short meeting of the organs of the brigade command on the daily engagement, where it was stressed --"

Q. Then colon.

A. Then colon. "Intervention unit would be engaged in Reka." No. It says, "Intervention unit continues to be engaged in the Reka action."

Q. What else was pointed out here? "Intervention unit continues to be engaged in the Reka action."

A. "The chief of engineering and the chief of ABHO, if the Terzanski and Ivanski bridge were to be destroyed, alternative routes should be ⁴⁵⁹⁷³ used, that there should be relocation of the command post."

Q. All right. So this is your morning meeting.

A. Yes.

Q. What is stated here is that, inter alia, what was discussed at that meeting, that the intervention unit is still engaged in that action, continues to be engaged.

A. Yes.

Q. When you said action is evolving according to plan and the dynamics involved, does that mean that you have to have a written plan for this action Reka, or is this the written plan for the Reka operation? Is it customary, since you're a professional soldier, to have a written plan for this kind of action or is this part of a general anti-terrorist effort? Have you heard of a written plan for Reka?

A. I did not see this plan, but I heard of it. I heard of the Reka plan.

Q. Now, your unit had assignments there on both days; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And it held a blockade line for both days.

A. Yes, at Cabrat.

Q. You didn't have any contact with the terrorist groups, did you?

A. No.

Q. You didn't go into operation, into action?

A. No, we didn't go into action. We didn't use any ammunition. We didn't have any casualties.

Q. All right. Thank you. On the 30th of April here, Mr. Nice - and ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁴ that's page 36 - quoted your entry here in the diary: "Signal sounded means the end of danger from the air SCVK." What does that all mean? "The operative centre was ordered not to open target -- open fire on targets in the air because our air force is in action. OCPRK ordered not to ..." et cetera.

Now, tell me, our air force, did our air force carry out any assignment of the bombing of any target in Kosovo and Metohija?

A. I am not aware of any such assignment, and I would have to have known if it had existed. And as has been reported here that our air force would be flying, I would have to know with certainty of each specific case and concrete case.

Q. All right. Fine. Let me just take a moment to find my way in these notes and entries. Ah, yes.

Now, Mr. Nice placed page 27 before you. The 21st of April is the date, and it was linked to -- well, actually he made some confusion between Meja and Maja and you explained that to us, but read out what it says -- read out what it says -- it was the 29th day of the war, the 27th page, at 0230 hours. The actions of enemy planes.

A. The action of enemy air force at the refugee camp of Maja in the area of Bistrazin village, and this attack used 23 projectiles of great destructive power, and as a result the whole settlement was completely destroyed.

Q. Yes. He asked you to start reading that passage and then you didn't go further. What does it say further on? What's the next entry?

A. "A team from the brigade toured the region where the action had ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁵ taken place, the action by enemy air force -" that is to say in brackets the Maja refugee camp - "and came across an atrocious site. Six persons killed, 32 were wounded, of which 18 seriously wounded and one child was in a critical state. The material damage was complete."

Q. So you provided us with an explanation as to why this kind of attack was entered, an entry was made of it. Did part of your unit go on the spot, on site?

A. Yes, that's right. It was in my area. It was near the bridge at Bistrazin, where we had a unit of ours stationed.

Q. Then what does it say in 20? One member, a MUP member was killed and one seriously wounded in the village of Meja; is that what it says?

A. Yes, that's what it says.

Q. Now, with respect to that, we have the next entry, and tell us what that says. What does your next entry say?

A. It says one member of the MUP was killed, one was seriously injured.

Q. And the next sentence? What's the next sentence? Read it out.

A. "The units were ordered to take measures of combat -- providing combat security and carry out tasks to --" just a minute, let me decipher this.

Q. It says west, something west of; is that right?

A. "The units were ordered to take measures of combat security and -- west of Cabrat, and the information that west of Cabrat there were 300 to 400 terrorist forces or, rather, Siptars --" in brackets it says "members of the Siptars, STC -- STS." So -- ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁶

Q. At 20 and 2000 -- 2400 hours, you were asked to raise your security readiness, combat security readiness; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. So combat security readiness, does that mean an attack or what?

A. No, it means to step up our awareness and alertness and our guards and everything, and to prepare for a possible attack.

Q. All right. Thank you. So you received information at the same time you were asked to raise your readiness, alert readiness, that there were 400 Siptar terrorists, about 400, 3 to 400. Now, how many of your men were in the area, those that manned the air defence weapons?

A. In Cabrat there were about a hundred of my soldiers of my unit -- members of my unit.

Q. And what were they?

A. They provided security for the command post of the brigade and catered to that command post.

Q. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, naturally I'd like to complete this witness's testimony before taking the break, but if you are going to be very much longer, then we will have to take the break. How much longer will you be?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I don't need too much -- too much longer, but another ten minutes, I think, because quite obviously --

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: I understand one hour and 45 minutes is the limit. We'll take the break for 20 minutes. ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁷

--- Recess taken at 10.39 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General Djosan, Mr. Nice showed you the 28th page, where it says: "In the last 24 hours -" if you can take a look - "there were intensive flights by enemy air force in the zone." And he showed you several examples of your entries where you record on page 30, for example, using almost the same words, that there were intensive flights but that the targets were outside the area which could be reached and targeted and out of range of your weapons.

So he mentioned some of these entries of yours made in your diary. What does this point to? Can you see the intensity of the action or not?

A. What we can see here is the intensity of the action by the fact that we did not respond to the planes flying overhead outside the range of our own equipment. In view of the range of our equipment, we were not able to target those planes for which we were certain we wouldn't be able to down them. And they were flying at extremely high altitudes, generally speaking.

Q. So your entries just relate to the positions of your brigade and nothing else and how that was affected -- and they were affected; is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. Mr. Nice showed you page 38, where at 1600 hours, what does it say there? From MUP information received. What does it say? Read it out, ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁸ please, yourself. He said that there was some rapes mentioned.

A. Information received from MUP told us that a group of soldiers had carried out rapes in Osek Hilja. The commander ordered a detailed investigation and urgent steps to be taken -- energetic steps to be taken.

Q. And what happened, actually?

A. There was a rape attempt on the part of one soldier in Osek Hilja, and we received information from MUP to that effect. We sent a security organ there to check the situation out, and a military police unit, and handed that soldier over to the court-martial in Pristina, along with a criminal report against him.

Q. All right. Fine. One more question. You explained to us or, rather, to Mr. Nice a moment ago what kind of reinforcements you sought. Can you be more precise and tell us what reinforcements you actually received, if you remember. If not, you needn't answer that question.

A. Yes, I do remember. First of all, we received a Tuba [phoen] battery of rocket systems when Cimbaljevic and Ivanovic, two of my soldiers, were killed. They were in Metohija for two days and returned. After that, the PUB type. Then we received several Bofors type cannons and a modified RR4 weapon.

Q. Tell me now, please: These reinforcements, the ones you received, were they exclusively for anti-air action or air defence action?

A. Yes, they were exclusively air defence weapons, the -- for targeting targets in the air at higher altitudes and with higher range. But the Bofors type of cannon was exclusively designed for anti-aircraft defence. ⁴⁵⁹⁷⁹

Q. Now, guns and cannons have their crews and so does this PUB system; is that right? Now, did a single soldier from that crew that you received as reinforcements take part in any other activities except for the anti-aircraft defence systems?

A. No, never. They were exclusively reinforcements, and their officers were there. Their commanding officers were there to command them. They were sent with them and they were included into my unit, but those soldiers were commanded over by the commanding officers of those units, and they were not deployed for any other purpose except anti-aircraft action, that is to say to target enemy planes.

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one more point, Mr. Robinson, if I may. I received from the liaison officer a copy of this document here. It is from Mr. Nice's office, from the OTP, and the title of it is - I had it in the Serbian language - "Final report to the Prosecutor by the committee established to review the NATO bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia." That's the title. And I'm sure you'll recall that during the examination-in-chief of Mr. Djosan, I quoted certain portions from that document which relate to NATO Air Force operations around Djakovica, attacks on the convoy on the 14th of April, 1999, and I also quoted point 64, where it says NATO initially denied but later acknowledged responsibility for this attack. And I wanted to ask -- or, rather, I wanted to tender that report into evidence.

[Trial Chamber confers] ^{45980 BLANK PAGE 45981}

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, anything to say on this?

MR. NICE: I think Your Honour had already expressed the tentative view that you thought the document might contain material of interest, and in light of that, I haven't focused on finding arguments to exclude it. It seems to me that its only value would be if it's set out in a summary way that was helpful to the Chamber some narrative of bombing by NATO because, of course, the accused's case is that the bombing drove people out. So to that extent, it might be of some assistance to you, and if it contains such material, which it may do, I don't object.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Very well, we'll admit it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you, General.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, before the witness goes and just to tidy something up, if I may. The Court asked about the reference to Nogavac in my questioning.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. NICE: Whether it was in the indictment or not, and I explained that it wasn't save for the limited extent we found, and I've been premising my questions on questions of the accused. The Court will find on day 431, between 11.11 and 48 seconds and 11.26 and 9 seconds the passages that stimulated my questioning. What happened was that the accused asked questions about Nogavac, and that was related to paragraph 63(a)(i). There was some intervention from the Court on clarification of what was being asked, and so on. The accused then turned to ask questions about shelling of Serbian villages -- of Kosovo ⁴⁵⁹⁸² villages. The witness answered immediately with an explanation of Nogavac and appeared to be focusing on the air attack on Nogavac, and the accused then asked questions about Colonel Vukovic, a witness for the Prosecution who had asserted that it was Serb planes that had dropped bombs on Nogavac.

So it's not in the indictment but it was in the evidence, and it may be that that passage of evidence is worth reviewing to see how this witness dealt with it.

Finally, if this witness is by any chance going to remain in the area of The Hague, it might be thought prudent to alert him to the restriction of discussing evidence in particular with the witness whose evidence has been interrupted as some similar issues will arise with him, similar to those that we've been dealing with this morning.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I still don't understand why if there was an allegation in the "As Seen, As Told" document that VJ planes had bombed Nogavac, killing a hundred persons, why wasn't it in the indictment?

MR. NICE: That I can't say, because I -- I wasn't the actual drafter of the indictment, if the Court will remember. But, Your Honour, there's a great many allegations beyond those in the indictment that could have been made as to commission of crimes, and there are a very large number of factual allegations or assertions that have been made by witnesses that aren't in the indictment but that are nevertheless admissible, either because they are part of the general background of the picture. ⁴⁵⁹⁸³ As it happens or for some other reason, but as it happens here, it appears both in "Under Orders" and also in the evidence of the witness to whom the accused referred, that these were VJ bombs but it hadn't been thought at the time appropriate to put it in the indictment.

[Trial Chamber confers]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to say that I'm not quite clear on something here. It's right at the top of our screens just now. It says that there was a question, that I asked questions about Colonel Vukovic who was a Prosecution witness and who said that the Serb planes targeted, et cetera. First of all, Colonel Vukovic is testifying now --

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... at the time it was Ali Hoti was the witness. I apologise for having spoken inaccurately in reviewing the position. The accused referred to the Prosecution witness Ali Hoti who he summarised as having said that he believed that on the 1st of April Serb planes dropped bombs on Nogavac.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I asked that question of Colonel Vukovic.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't asked that question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I asked Colonel Vukovic the question and he explained to us that NATO planes had bombed Nogavac, and here we even have a map from the testimony of Colonel Delic which shows F16R, that is to say that particular plane that was used to target Nogavac on the 1st ⁴⁵⁹⁸⁴ and 2nd of April, 1999.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic. I consider we have dealt with that point sufficiently.

General, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the Tribunal to testify. I remind you that you are not to discuss your evidence with any person who is likely to testify here, and I have in mind in particular the witness who will be testifying right after you, Colonel Vukovic.

May we have a separate number for the NATO document that the accused has just tendered.

THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. That will be D323.

MR. NICE: And the full version of the diary and the English translation.

JUDGE KWON: That should be replaced or --

MR. NICE: I'm not going to make proposals for the Registry and Chambers because I don't know what is best, most secure as a method of dealing with exhibits. It could either replace the original tab and all go in there together or it could be given a new number, as is likely to be most convenient.

JUDGE ROBINSON: May we have a new number, then, for that Prosecution Exhibit.

[Trial Chamber confers]

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll replace the previous tab with the new document, but only those parts that were referred to; and those parts that ⁴⁵⁹⁸⁵ are not translated will be marked for identification. Let the witness Colonel Vukovic be brought in.

[The witness entered court]

WITNESS: VLATKO VUKOVIC [Resumed]

[Witness answered through interpreter]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Colonel, you remain subject to the declaration you made.

We'll sit, in light of the witness's health condition, for one hour and then break, and resume after the 20-minute interval. Mr. Milosevic.

Examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]

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

A. Good morning, Mr. Milosevic.

Q. In paragraph 63 we have allegations of deportation, and paragraph 66 relates to murder, but they both allege the same. I will tell you what both of them say. Namely, it says that on the 27th of April --

THE INTERPRETER: Could we please have a precise reference.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, the interpreters are asking, and so am I, for a precise reference.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 63(a)(i) and 66(i) relate to what I'm just quoting, namely that: "Forces of the FRY and Serbia launched a great offensive in Carragojs and Trava, intending to expel the population from that area." And the text is identical in paragraph 63 and 64.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What can you say, Colonel, about these allegations? ⁴⁵⁹⁸⁶

A. I can say that they are not true; namely, that there was no large offensive. I engaged only a smaller part of my unit: Three rifle platoons, one platoon of military police, a medical unit, and part of the communications unit. All in all, about a hundred men. I know that my neighbour on the right wing had 40 to 50 men, not more. My neighbour on the left wing, Combat Group 2, could have had about a hundred men from -- that was from the 125th Brigade. So we cannot talk about a large offensive.

Our immediate task -- in fact, security was provided by MUP on the Djakovica-Pec road. I don't know how many men they had engaged, but it cannot be said by any means that it was a large offensive. Incidentally, the term "offensive" can be used and makes sense only when strategic groups are engaged.

As for this expulsion of civilians, I have already spoken about that. I said that the army never expelled the population, and that is true of this case as well. What was going on was an anti-terrorist action and that alone. And I can remind you that on the 29th of April, a ground part of the aggression took place on the Kosare axis. In parallel with that, terrorist forces reappeared in our rear, specifically in the broader area of Racaj village. That is why the corps command issued a decision to organise and mount this anti-terrorist action for the sole purpose of neutralising terrorist activity in our rear, to secure safe passage along roads, including Djakovica-Junik road in this case and Djakovica-Pec. Therefore, the sole purpose of that operation was to neutralise Siptar terrorist forces. ⁴⁵⁹⁸⁷

Q. Are you aware if during that anti-terrorist action there was any expulsion of civilians?

A. No, I don't know of any expulsions at all. There were refugees on the 27th as well as on the 28th and partially on the 29th of April, but they were fleeing from Pec municipality. Namely, along that road passing by my units people were passing from Pec, and there was no combat activity in that area at the time except for NATO airstrikes.

Q. Where were you at that time on the 27th and the 28th of April?

A. I think it's more convenient to show that on the map, if you allow me. The map for that May operation exists, although it's not from the period when that anti-terrorist action took place. The map was done subsequently, but it reflects the actual state of affairs. I have it under number 21. I have a black and white copy only, and it would be better to have a colour map because there are many things that we can't see on the black and white version.

MR. NICE: If we could have the corresponding Delic, I imagine it is, exhibit number, we may be able to find an original in colour.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether the map was introduced through General Djosan, because part of his unit is shown here as well.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is among Colonel Vukovic's exhibits on the list of admitted evidence, a number 21, and it was introduced through General Djosan under tab 29.1.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 320. You're welcome. ⁴⁵⁹⁸⁸

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, proceed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Have you found the map?

A. Yes, yes. The map has been placed on the ELMO. Here in the southern part you see the disposition of my battalion partly in defence. We have explained this map before.

Part of my unit was in the blockade line on the left bank of Renik river, along the fringes of Korenica village. Posavoja [phoen] Meja-Orize village, about a kilometre away, and trig point 421, around village Kodra and Kikes. As I said, three rifle platoons and one platoon of the military police. My command post for that anti-terrorist action was in an abandoned house on the road between Djakovica town and Korenica village, and that's where I was on the 27th and the 28th of April. Some smaller forces, part of my unit, remained there also on the 29th and the 30th to control the territory.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to draw your attention that the witness did not mention any village called Posavoja. I don't know how this came to be recorded. He was just explaining where his forces were at the time, and I would like this to be corrected.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Colonel, further on in the same paragraph, it says that a large number of members of the forces of the FRY and Serbia were used and several check points were set up. Throughout that day, villagers left their homes under direct threat from the forces of the FRY and Serbia and joined several convoys of refugees. ⁴⁵⁹⁸⁹

A. I've already answered that question. We did not engage large forces. In fact, in this anti-terrorist action, the army did not have any assignment or task and did not set up any checkpoints. We can see on the map, and I know from remembering my task, that it was our assignment to take up positions on the line of blockade and not to allow terrorists to pull out along two axes. One axis was Racaj village, Korenica, and further on towards the border with Albania. And the second axis was from Racaj village towards Djakovica town. That's at least the task that my unit received.

So there were no checkpoints. The only checkpoint was permanently in Brekovac village on the bridge at the very entrance to Djakovica. It was a mixed checkpoint. MUP members checked civilians and MUP members, whereas my military police organs exclusively checked members of the army and the military traffic that took place, according to the assignment.

Q. You have explained that. But is it true that villagers left their homes under direct threat from the forces of the FRY and Serbia?

A. I think I've said that as well: There were no threats issued, nor did anyone force these villagers to leave their homes. I can tell you by way of an example. It's not on the map, there is -- there is a hamlet Sufi Dol near Korenica village. I can't remember the name of that man, but his son is Ranko, member of the MUP. He is a fireman but engaged in the MUP. In his house there were ten Siptar families from among his neighbours taking shelter there. So ten families. No single Siptar family had less than ten members, so you can imagine the total number. And they said the terrorists had told them to leave the ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁰ area. They sought assistance and help from that policeman, and they stayed with him all the time until the 28th when this area had been cleansed from terrorist forces, after which they returned to their homes, and I know that they were there at least until the 14th of June when I left the area with my unit.

Q. Thank you, Colonel. Further on it is alleged that in Meja, Korenica, and Meja-Orize from a mass of fleeing villagers, a large and as-yet undetermined number of Kosovo Albanian civilian males were separated and abducted. Many of them were summarily executed and many of them are still missing.

Do you know anything about this? Is this true?

A. This is not true, and the allegations are not accurate at all. I don't know who was executed and how. If you have a list or something, maybe you can tell me the gender of those people, the age brackets, or maybe I could be of some assistance. But I assert that the army did not separate men from women. They didn't kill anybody. They did nothing apart from the activity targeted at terrorists.

Q. It says further on that: "Seven people who were last seen around Meja on the 27th of April, 1999, were later found --" In fact: "Identity documents pertaining to at least seven persons who were last seen at Meja on the 27th of April, 1999, were found on bodies exhumed from a clandestine mass grave located in Batajnica. "

A. Well, if you have a list, maybe I can give you an answer.

Q. Well, here in the appendix there is a schedule of persons killed in Meja whose names are known, killed on the 27th of April. That's on ⁴⁵⁹⁹¹ page 56 of the Serbian version of this amended indictment. And I would like this page 56 to be placed on the overhead projector.

Do you know anything about this?

A. [Previous translation continues]... in English.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 56 is in Serbian. That is Schedule 1, or Schedule L -- I. I, okay.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So these are the persons killed in Meja in this anti-terrorist action that you referred to, according to the allegations from this indictment.

A. I suppose this is their age.

Q. Look below. It is written in English. That's Meja.

A. Mr. Milosevic, we can see that except for two children aged 14 and 15, all the rest are able-bodied men fit for military service. If these men were killed, if these persons were killed, they could have been killed only in combat.

Incidentally, these names don't mean anything to me, but I'm just looking at the age bracket.

Q. So you assert that they could have been killed only in combat?

A. In this area, only in combat, because generally speaking we were exposed to a lot of terrorist activity, and we responded in kind.

Q. Have you ever heard the term that I just referred to, that some men were executed? I'm not going to add "summarily," or not, but it says summarily executed here. Have you ever heard of anyone being executed? ^{45992 BLANK PAGE 45993}

A. That is nonsense, pure nonsense, especially those mass executions. I can guarantee there was no such thing, certainly not in this area, and I am not aware that they happened anywhere else. In my unit it certainly couldn't have happened.

Q. On that day did your unit carry out any transfer of civilians?

A. We had no contact with civilians except for early in the morning, around 8.30, and I can describe you -- to you that instance. Early in the morning, around 8.00 or 8.30, at least it was 8.30 when I received the report, here in Korenica village a platoon commander noticed a group of civilians, perhaps 50 or 60 of them, and he sent a patrol, which means two soldiers. There is a cemetery nearby. I'm not sure whether you will be able to see it on the map. So he sent two soldiers to see where those civilians were from and to tell them to go home, to tell them they shouldn't be there. And when the soldiers approached, when they were about 20 metres away from the group, fire was suddenly opened at them and a bomb was thrown, a grenade was thrown. Two soldiers were wounded, one more seriously, one less seriously.

The platoon commander sent reinforcements, and the terrorists later probably withdrew towards Korenica village. I know that later, because I sent an ambulance to pull out those wounded soldiers and take them to the military hospital.

The platoon commander let the civilians pass towards Renik river and told them to go towards the town of Djakovica because it was the safest place and there were certainly no terrorists there. And that was ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁴ the only case on that day - and that goes for the 28th as well - that we had any contact with the civilian population.

Along the road from Junik to Djakovica throughout the day both on the 27th and the 28th, civilians were passing by us but we didn't stop them and we didn't check their IDs or anything because we didn't have that mission.

There were, on the contrary, soldiers who would give them some food and water, because there were elderly people among them and there were many children, and they were exhausted from the walking. But apart from that, there was certainly no other contact. The platoon on the left wing moved during the night about 150 to 200 metres. This is north of the road between Junik and Djakovica. Precisely for those reasons, namely, that civilians who were passing by would not come across any military people.

Q. When you said now that the group opened fire at your unit, did your unit fire then --

A. No.

Q. -- towards that group?

A. No. Only for the sake of the safety of the civilians. And I already said that two of my soldiers were wounded during the first attack. Of course, the commander needed about ten minutes in order to get closer with the reinforcements, and by then the terrorists managed to withdraw to the first houses, whereas the civilians were running towards the military. That speaks in itself.

Q. That they were not afraid of the army, you mean? ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁵

A. Yes, that they were not afraid of the army.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. As for what happened in Meja, and I'm not sure because I haven't got it marked here, Mr. Robinson, the statement made by Mr. Vukovic, which is number 22 in the previously admitted evidence, you can check your own list, number 22, I know that this statement --

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... exhibit number because then it will be easier to find. 22 on a list. If the accused can give us the original exhibit number, otherwise I'll look it up.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This was in tab 31 in Milos Djosan's exhibits. 30.1. And that is Colonel Vukovic's statement, and it has to do with what his unit did on the 27th and the 28th. This is 320, and the tab is 30.1.

Mr. Robinson, I'm just checking whether this was admitted into evidence. It was marked for identification and to be admitted at a subsequent date. That is the statement that Colonel Vukovic gave in relation to what the unit was doing on the 27th and on the 28th. And that's precisely what he was speaking of now.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. The exhibit number for Djosan is 321, just for correction.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. It's admitted, yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁶

Q. Beqe Beqaj was a witness who testified here and he said that in August 1998 the villagers of Racaj and other places first left the village when the police arrived there and in the neighbouring villages. The page number is 9116 and 9117. And then on the 14th of April, 1999, the army and the MUP arrived in Racaj again and the witness says that they ordered the villagers to leave their homes. Is that correct? What do you know about that?

A. The latter part is not correct but first part is correct. I can talk about this because I participated in this anti-terrorist action. At the beginning of August 1998, and that can be see on this map, although these markings do not date back to that period, when the terrorist strongholds were broken up - and these were probably the strongest in the area of Kosovo and Metohija, that is to say Smonica, and Nec - an anti-terrorist action was continued at Nec, Ramoc, Racaj, Pacaj, Dolosaj. In this anti-terrorist action, part of my unit took part as well. In the early morning, before the action started, a villager from Ramoc, who saw that the army is getting ready to act near Nec, he walked up to the soldiers and asked to speak to the commander. So he was brought to my command post. What he said to me here was that the terrorists even two days before that had left the village of Ramoc and that after the terrorists left, the villagers collected the weapons and handed over to the organs of the Ministry of the Interior. The terrorists forced them to buy rifles at the price of 200 Deutschmark at that, and there were even cases when they were beaten by terrorists, that is to say those who didn't want to buy weapons. ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁷ He guaranteed to me that there weren't any armed terrorists in the village. And then together with him, of course, the army, in its firing deployment, walked up to the village, realised that there was no fighting taking place, that there were no attacks at the unit and that there weren't any armed people in the village, although there were dug-outs and trenches around the village.

This villager, as a matter of fact, took us to the area between Ramoc and Korenica, and in two places there, there were anti-tank mines. So we even marked them. He didn't know about the hamlet of Kocaj, though, whether there were any terrorists in it or not. I'm saying that the entire village of Racaj was populated and that the villagers were there.

Q. Let's just get this clear, Colonel. You said the first part is partly correct. What did you mean?

A. That the army was there. But first I'm telling about the village of Ramoc, and this is a villager from Racaj. I will get to that, if you allow me.

Q. Please go ahead.

A. From the hamlet of Kocaj fire was opened. Terrorists fired at my unit. They were neutralised very soon. I think that this went on for about ten minutes only and they probably fled to the forest here and towards Racaj.

When part of my unit came to the village of Racaj from where this witness is, the witness who gave the statement, there weren't any villagers there. In the village of Racaj, the military police unit had already arrived, those who were active in the area, but I do know that ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁸ lists were found of an entire unit. Photographs were found of men in uniform and armed. In one house we found a big warehouse of food supplies and medical supplies. A completely new cellar had been dug and it was well masked with a new door too.

On the basis of all of this, I concluded that in this area there was a large terrorist group and that they were getting ready for a longer stay in the area.

That is what I wanted to say about the military there and the villagers leaving the village. However, according to the information I received then from my colleagues from the military police, they left before the action started, which was only to be expected. It's the normal thing to do.

Then my unit returned to Ramoc and they were there for about ten days in order to keep the territory under their control. There weren't any incidents with civilians whatsoever. As a matter of fact, my own medical doctor examined civilians and gave them some medication. Of course, they returned the favour by giving food, whatever they had, at that point in time.

Q. All right. What you explained just now had to do with 1998; right?

A. Yes, 1998.

Q. And now I'm asking you about what this same witness said, namely that on the 14th of April the army and the MUP came to the village of Racaj, and then he says that they ordered the villagers to leave their homes. ⁴⁵⁹⁹⁹

A. Well, the soldiers were certainly not in the village of Racaj on the 14th of April. The biggest combat unit in this village was my battalion, and I know for sure that not a single soldier, let alone the entire unit, were in the mentioned village on that day. So that is absolutely incorrect.

Q. All right. So we're not going to dwell on it any longer. Xhevahire Syla, a witness here, stated --

JUDGE BONOMY: Have I got this correct, that that answer, which lasted for several minutes, was all about 1998 in answer to a question about 1999, or did I miss something?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, just partly, because the question pertained to Beqe Beqaj's statement, who said that in August 1998, the population of Racaj left the village on account of the military and then that the army came in again on the 14th of April, 1999. So it pertains to both.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Xhevahire Syla, a witness here, stated that on the 14th of April mixed Serb forces entered Nivokaz, municipality of Djakovica. That they entered Albanian houses, giving people five minutes to leave them, and that is how a convoy was established that went to Djakovica, and that the police attacked some people who were in the convoy and told them to go to Albania. They were not allowed to leave the route that they took to Prizren, and that was a roundabout road. And then she says that they were stopped near Bistrazin on a bridge there and that the convoy was hit by a NATO bomb, and soon after, that three low-flying aircraft with Serb flags ⁴⁶⁰⁰⁰ bombed the convoy seven times and killed 70 to 80 persons. I've told you everything now, everything that she said happened on the 14th of April.

A. As for the village of Nivokaz, I was not there then so I cannot comment upon this. As for the rest, it is untrue to a large extent. It is correct that at that time the NATO aeroplanes targeted convoys of civilians near -- in the village of Meja, Bistrazin, Rogovo, and Slatzkoj [phoen] and near the Trzin bridge. They started around 1400 hours and finished around 1500 hours.

As for our aircraft, well, at that time they weren't flying at all. This is the 14th of April. They were not flying for well-known reasons: Because there was total supremacy of NATO in the airspace, and truth to tell, there was nothing that could have been flying anyway. Now, it's quite illogical, this statement of hers. How could she see three low-flying aircraft with Serb flags? When a plane is targeting, it is flying at a speed of at least 500 kilometres per hour. If an aircraft is flying that fast, you cannot even see it as it flies away, let alone see details of that kind on the aircraft itself. Secondly, any normal person, when being bombed by an air force - I mean, even a soldier whose profession this is - the first thing that a person does is duck, hide in a shelter, rather than look at aeroplanes. This is true, though, that the NATO Air Force precisely and intentionally targeted columns of refugees and that in this convoy there were many casualties. Many people were killed and many wounded. Over 80 persons killed and several hundred wounded. ⁴⁶⁰⁰¹ I have a book here that testifies about that crime. If you wish, I can show it here. Among other things, you can see there that the pilot on the aircraft was ordered to fire at the column of civilians. If you wish, I can show that to you.

Q. Please go ahead.

A. This is a book, "Traces of Inhumanity," and it was published towards the end of 1999. In all fairness, the photographs are black and white but it's better that they're this way because this is so gory, even for us who were there in the area. It is terrible for us to see it again. This witness talked about Bistrazin but first it started in Meja around 14.30 hours. It can be seen very clearly that this was a column of civilians, refugees on tractors, that there is no military technical equipment.

On the next page you can see the effects of the attack of the NATO Air Force. I can tell you straight away that first aid was provided, as well as transportation of the wounded and the dead, and that was a very difficult thing to do. It was first done by the police units and then the army came in too.

Now, these pictures show terrible scenes from Bistrazin. Here, on page 86, there is a conversation that was recorded between the fighter plane pilot and his command post in the airspace.

Q. Please read what it says.

A. "Good day, Charlie Bravo." That is the F16 pilot introducing himself. "I am at position 10. Below there is no movement. Request information on red MiGs." There is a reference to our planes. "Charlie ⁴⁶⁰⁰² Bravo AWACS Michael --" or rather, AWACS in parenthesis -- "go to the north-west, direction Prizren-Djakovica. No red MiGs in the air. Okay. I'm going to 3.000 feet." That's about 1.000 metres. "Michael to Charlie Bravo: You are getting a reinforcement in ten minutes. There is going to be something interesting south of Djakovica. "Charlie Bravo to Mike: We are getting out of the clouds. I cannot see anything else.

"Michael to Charlie Bravo: Go further on to the north. The course is 280.

"Charlie Bravo to Mother: Keep 3.000 feet. Below me is a column of automobiles, some kind of tractors. What is this? Request instructions.

"Mother to Charlie Bravo: Can you see the tanks? I repeat, where are the tanks?

"Charlie Bravo to Mother: I see tractors. I guess the red ones didn't camouflage tanks as tractors.

"Mother to Charlie Bravo: What kind of strange convoy is this, what kind of civilians, dammit? All of this is of Serb making. Destroy the target.

"Charlie Bravo to Mother: What am I supposed to destroy, tractors, ordinary cars? I repeat, I cannot see any tanks. I request further instructions.

"Mother to Charlie Bravo: This is a military target, a completely legitimate military target. Destroy the target. I repeat: Destroy the target. ⁴⁶⁰⁰³ "Charlie Bravo to Mother: I understand. I'm launching." And even the spokesman of NATO, the liar Jamie Shea, under pressure from the public, had to admit that NATO committed this crime. But it is only natural that he invented straight away that phrase "collateral damage." And I claim that this -- this was targeted intentionally. This objective was targeted intentionally, and this can be seen from the orders received by the pilot.

Q. Thank you, Colonel. We're moving to the next witness now. Zumani [phoen] said that on the 14th of April Serb soldiers entered the village of Dobros. First of all, do you know where the village of Dobros lies and were any of your units in the village of Dobros?

A. I know where the village of Dobros is, and indeed I know the overall area of Kosovo and Metohija, but my unit was far away from that village, so that I cannot be of assistance to you when it comes to that village because I wasn't there.

Q. Now, we're not dealing with that village, but what she says is when they passed by Djakovica and reached close to the Bistrazin bridge the witness heard an explosion and saw that smoke was coming from the convoy that was in front of her and that there were bodies at the place of the explosion and a tractor was destroyed too by the bombs that fell from the air. Is that what happened?

A. That's what I've just been talking about. They weren't bombs, they were rockets from F16 fighter planes, to be accurate, but a civilian, of course, doesn't differentiate between bombs and rockets. So that is ^{46004 BLANK PAGE 46005} precisely what I was talking about a moment ago.

Q. Very well. Now, Colonel, count 53 of the indictment relating to Kosovo states that I planned, incited, ordered, instigated, ordered, committed, or otherwise aided and abetted in a deliberate and widespread or systematic campaign of terror and violence directed at Kosovo Albanian civilians living in Kosovo in the FRY. And that with the help of forces from the FRY and Serbia, was executed acting at the direction with the aim of having a substantial portion of the Kosovo Albanian population expelled from Kosovo and establish Serb control in the province. That's what it says in that paragraph and under that charge of the indictment.

Do you know -- did you know then or do you know today, have you ever heard about any of this, any sort of campaign, plan, goal or anything of that kind which could even in small detail resemble what I've just read out?

A. I am not aware of any of this. I don't know about any of that, nor did I ever see or hear about a plan of any kind. Otherwise, let me say that the army at that time was performing its duties prescribed by the constitution, and that was to defend the sovereignty of its territory, the independence and constitutional order of the country. So that I have never heard of any plan of this kind, or any other assignment at all, nor did my army or my unit ever receive a plan of that kind or execute any assignment which would be linked to some sort of plan of this kind.

Q. All right. Now, in paragraph 55 it says that the forces of the FRY and Serbia, in a deliberate and widespread or systematic manner ⁴⁶⁰⁰⁶ forcibly expelled and internally displaced hundreds of thousands of Kosovo Albanians from their homes across the entire province of Kosovo, creating an atmosphere of fear and oppression through the use of force, threats of force and acts of violence.

Tell me, please, is that true? Did you, did you the army, did any of you ever hear of an idea similar to this?

A. That is absolutely not true, not correct. My command post was for a time in the area of the Brekovac village, which is at the very entrance to Djakovica. And in that particular village, at my command post there, there were a lot of Gypsies, there were several Serb families, but a lot of Siptars as well. And there was a family living there, if I remember correctly, Cehu was their name, and his nephew Aqir Cehu, or cousin, was one of the local commanders of the terrorist organisation the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army. And he was a loyal citizen, so we didn't mind having him there regardless of the fact that his cousin was even a KLA commander, terrorist commander. He didn't bother us. And then there was Moglica family. Several houses belonging to go that household. I can't quote the exact names of the family, the first names, but I can provide lists of Siptars living in Brekovac, for example. Furthermore, had we had the intention of expelling anybody whatsoever, well, it would be logical to suppose that we'd do that from the area of defence first of all, from our line of defence. And let me tell you this: The population left exclusively the places that were being bombed out of the fear of the bombing, and this Asifiza [phoen] crossed over to the village of Moglica, and they proved -- ⁴⁶⁰⁰⁷ it was proved that they made the right decision, because that village was later targeted with bombs.

Q. Why was it bombed later?

A. Mr. Milosevic, during the war there was not a single unit ever there. I used this road exclusively when I toured part of the units at their positions. And it was also used by vehicles, for example, of individuals who went to fetch supplies from Djakovica and that area. And I assume that they targeted it because all the other settlements or inhabited areas is where the population had stayed on, and they wanted to get them moving for an alleged humanitarian catastrophe. Petrusan, Doj [phoen], Krusevac, all those outlying villages. But Bistrazin is the largest place. They stayed there throughout the war. There were never any incidents there. There was just one case, for example, of theft when a tractor was taken unlawfully, and the owner, the lady owner of the tractor turned up and said that the army had taken off her tractor, but we managed to find her tractor for her and return it to her. So that was only incident that happened like that, that is to say an incident involving the civilian population.

There was another case that was termed a war crime where a soldier at a checkpoint killed a civilian, but later on we were not able to -- he was certainly not from these villages. We established that later on. But the civilian was unarmed and the soldier was arrested, an investigation was conducted, and all the other steps taken that are usually taken in cases of that kind. And the -- there was a criminal file filed against the soldier, and he was turned over to a military court, a court-martial. ⁴⁶⁰⁰⁸ And I have the criminal report with me against that soldier. If you want me to show it to you, I'll be happy to do so.

Q. Well, I think what you've just told us will be enough. Now, paragraph 56 says that throughout Kosovo forces of the FRY and Serbia engaged in a deliberate and widespread or systematic campaign of destruction of property owned by Kosovo Albanian civilians by widespread shelling of towns and villages. So a deliberate campaign of destruction of property, shelling of towns and villages, the burning and destruction of property, including homes, farms, businesses, cultural monuments and religious sites, and the destruction of personal property. Was that part of your activities in any sense whatsoever?

A. No. Quite certainly this wasn't part of my activities. My activities and the activities of my unit I described yesterday or, rather, the previous working day. I testified about all that. And otherwise it would be senseless to shell towns. In all large inhabited areas, especially in towns, you had your own forces there. So who, anybody in his right mind, would shell a town where his own men or his own units were located?

Shelling in the broader sense of the word, rocketing and bombing, was exclusively done by the air force, by NATO air forces. I did have one case where houses were burnt by a soldier without any cause. Two houses were set on fire to the east of this map in a place called Damjane, but steps were taken to apprehend the perpetrator straight away, and cases like that didn't repeat themselves.

Q. Very well, Colonel. When you said that this was not done by unit, ⁴⁶⁰⁰⁹ do you have awareness of any single unit of the Yugoslav army engaging in violence of this kind; shelling of towns and villages, destruction of property, and so on and so forth?

A. No, I'm not aware of any of that. I don't know of anything like that happening. Had anything like that happened, I would have to have known because I was in that position and in that locality, and otherwise, I'm sure you know, everything that I'm saying I'm saying from my own experience because I was constantly in the field, on the terrain. And furthermore, I received regular information from my neighbouring units. I would receive reports from the superior command. I would receive reports from my own subordinate units, so that it -- anything like that is impossible. It could not have happened without me knowing about it.

Q. Now, is it true what is claimed here, that the forces of the army accompanied -- escorted the expelled Albanians to the border because they wanted to keep their movements under control in that way, up to the border?

A. I've already told you five or six times that there were no expulsed Siptars. Those people who did leave left alone of their own -- if they were expelled, then they were expelled exclusively by the terrorists. They forced them to leave. And they were assisted by NATO forces with deliberate targeting and destruction of civilian facilities. Now, as far as control is concerned, I can speak about my own zone, my own area, where I said that the Cafa Prusit crossing point, border crossing point, which was in the area of responsibility of my unit, that there was an obstruction that had been set up in the infantry sense ⁴⁶⁰¹⁰ and in the armoured vehicle sense. And in-depth along that road to the left and right of the road obstacles had been set up. Anti-air -- anti-armoured mines. I'm sorry, my speech is getting worse. But anti-armour minefields were set up, and that means that a mine well had been dug up, a large amount of explosives planted, linked up with the electrical network, and for security reasons, for the safety of the civilians and population during those five days when they were crossing across that border crossing, the army escorted them to the border so that they should not move to the left or right and wouldn't lose their lives on our territory by stepping into the minefield. Otherwise, there was no other expulsion or escorting or placing them under control. Why would I maintain control over their movements, the movements of civilians if they were not armed in the firing positions of my unit? That is nonsense.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll take -- Mr. Milosevic, we'll take the break now. Twenty minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.21 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.46 p.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Before I continue, Mr. Robinson, I wish to ask that the book the witness used while answering one of the questions titled "The Trails of Inhumanity," from which he showed photographs and read an exchange between the pilot and the command centre when a civilian target was bombed, I wish that book to be tendered into evidence.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, you know what position I take on the ⁴⁶⁰¹¹ transcript, in the absence of being satisfied that it's a reliable transcript, it's not something I can cross-examine to and I'm not sure the book would be of any value. The Chamber knows, of course, the position of the Prosecution already on this particular event. It's not challenged that it's a NATO event. I would invite the Chamber to defer consideration of this as an exhibit until I've been able to take, if I can, a final position on whether I accept the evidence or not. Otherwise, you're putting in, allowing in something that is untestable hearsay where had --

JUDGE KWON: And can't identify the source of the information.

MR. NICE: Can't identify the source, and all sorts of things, but --

JUDGE ROBINSON: And you say that it may very well be that you may accept it.

MR. NICE: I certainly accept the events in part because it's not been challenged that this is a NATO event. It's a question of what if anything -- what weight, if anything -- if any, should attach to that alleged transcript of the conversation between the pilot and the base control. That's something that I can't deal with at the moment.

MR. KAY: I think it might be in the NATO report. I don't have my copy with me as I've just filed it, but I think it's in the NATO report.

JUDGE KWON: I was about to ask the witness if he knows anything about the source of information, the conversation between Charlie Bravo and Mother.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, the source is intelligence gathered by the unit, namely part of the 52nd Company for electronic ⁴⁶⁰¹² surveillance and anti-electronic action, which was partly based in Djakovica. So this is a recording of radio traffic between the pilot and the command plane. Also, this conversation was broadcast on several TV channels.

JUDGE KWON: Do you mean that it was recorded by the brigade commanded by General Djosan?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. The 52nd Company for electronic surveillance was a unit of the corps, unit of the Pristina Corps, and it so happened that one part of that unit was based in Djakovica.

JUDGE KWON: Then you should have had the original raw material which contains the very recording.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, I did not receive any material from that company. It's logical that all such material was forwarded to the corps command, to the intelligence unit, where they process all this information, and make it available to other units. The chain of command is such that --

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: In the circumstances, we'll defer the question of the admission of this document until later. Continue, Mr. Milosevic. You're finished?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Robinson. Just a minute. I have a couple of questions left.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You explained a moment ago how you let the civilians pass through. Several days ago, you told us that you tried to persuade civilians who ⁴⁶⁰¹³ were on their way to go across the border to stay, and you said that villagers from some villages near the border had the goodwill to receive them, to put them up.

A. Yes. I spoke about more than that. Here is the village of Zub. It was possible to reach that village by motor vehicles, because further on, towards the border crossing, the road was impassable in several points due to obstacles placed. There were about 30 elderly persons and small children among them, and the villagers wanted to receive them, but they didn't want any of that. They insisted that they had to go. And whenever we asked them why they had to go, they said they were afraid of the bombing in the first place. There were also some people who said they were afraid of the terrorists. And on the basis of that, I made my conclusions.

But I can tell you that a systematic campaign of intimidation of civilians was going on, and I can show you some of the leaflets that were being thrown from NATO aeroplanes, and they were meant for the civilian population, certainly not for the soldiers of my unit, because they had no effect on the soldiers of my unit and, as far as I know, no effect on any other unit. Because whoever sees this will understand such -- will understand very clearly that such messages can frighten only civilians, because the army exists, among other things, to engage in combat, whereas civilians are neither trained nor prepared for that. Look at this. You will see a strategic bomber, B52. They were also used to strike at my unit and the rest of the brigade as well in a massive way. And it says -- you can read this. You can see a black bird, ⁴⁶⁰¹⁴ which is a nickname for this strategic bomber. You can see this black bird dropping bombs, and it says: "Thousands of bombs. The will, power, and support of the world are there to drop them tirelessly on your unit."

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Colonel.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Let us go on.

A. There's this one too: "Horrible death. Don't wait for me," et cetera.

Q. You say these leaflets produced a strong effect on the population.

A. A very strong effect, but exclusively on civilians. They had no effect whatsoever on my unit, on my soldiers. I even expected that a power -- a great power like NATO could think of something better to frighten our army, but no.

Q. Colonel, paragraph 61 is dedicated to the seizure and destruction of personal identity documents and licenses of vehicles. Have you heard of anything like that?

A. I heard about cases when documents were seized, but let me say immediately that the army never did that, that it was nonsense. It made no sense to take somebody's papers from them because everybody, every citizen -- every citizen of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, if they lose their IDs, can get another, can get a replacement. So it makes no sense to seize somebody's documents. There is a perfectly regular procedure to obtain a duplicate, a replacement.

I heard of only one case that happened on the border crossing of Vrbnica -- ⁴⁶⁰¹⁵

JUDGE ROBINSON: Ordinarily how long would it take to get a duplicate?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A duplicate of what? I don't understand.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You just said that it would make no sense for the army to seize these identity documents because it would be relatively easy to obtain duplicates. I'm asking how long would it take to get a duplicate, to obtain a duplicate?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry I didn't understand you the first time. There is a regulation of the Ministry of the Interior. The longest time you can wait for a new passport is three to five days, I believe. Don't take my word for it, though, not exactly. For a personal ID it's even less. I don't know about the licence for a vehicle. But the normal time is three to five days to be issued with a document. Of course, if you submit a proper application with the photographs and the amount of money prescribed.

I waited, for instance, only three days to get my passport. I did not finish my answer, if you allow me, regarding the seizure of documents.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please go ahead.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know about this one case on the border crossing of Vrbnica. I'm saying again this is outside the defence area of my unit, but I heard that a couple of policemen had been taking IDs from Siptar civilians, and they even took off some licence plates from a number of vehicles. The incident was immediately reported to the ^{46016 BLANK PAGE 46017} brigade commander but also to the chief of MUP. Since the brigade commander was otherwise engaged at the time, and there was a unit of the MUP close to the border crossing, the chief of MUP Prizren personally went there, ordered that such cases must not happen again. And if I'm not mistaken, he also ordered some steps to be taken against the MUP members who did that.

Q. You are talking about the intervention of the chief of Prizren MUP when he found out about this incident.

A. Yes. The reaction was quick, and this irregularity was eliminated.

Q. Tell me one more thing. As an officer of the army of Yugoslavia, have you ever received an order, be it verbal or any kind, to exert pressure let alone deport Kosovo Albanians?

A. Every order has the same weight regardless of whether it is verbal or written, but I never received an order to deport a single person let alone a group. I can even tell you that I would never execute an order of that kind, and I don't think you can find a single officer of the army of Yugoslavia who would be prepared to carry out such an order. And anyway, in the army it is clearly defined what kind of orders can be issued and what orders have to be carried out and what orders don't have to be carried out.

Q. Did you ever receive any information about any plan of ethnic cleansing?

A. No. I never heard or saw any sort of plan of that kind, nor did I hear anything about any colleague of mine hearing or seeing it. ⁴⁶⁰¹⁸

Q. How about the chain of command in Kosovo and Metohija? Was it operating properly?

A. Where the army is concerned, the chain of command operated just as anywhere else in the territory of Yugoslavia. The system of command and control is governed by the constitution of Yugoslavia from 1993. And if I remember correctly, there is Article 135, which says that the army of Yugoslavia in peacetime and in war is commanded by the president of the republic pursuant to the decisions of the Supreme Defence Council. The law on the army develops this stipulation. It copies provisions from the constitution, saying that the army of Yugoslavia is an armed force defending the sovereignty, the territory, independence, and constitutional order. And in Article 3 it says that commanding in the army is based on the principles of singleness of command with the use of -- singleness of command and subordination.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Colonel, I'm not sure whether this is a question that you can answer, whether the chain of command was operating properly. You haven't attempted to answer it, and it may very well be that you're not in a position to answer it.

I think that's a matter that we'll have to determine for ourselves, Mr. Milosevic. Let us try to finish the examination of this witness. Do you have any other questions?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have just a few more questions left.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you have any knowledge about direct concert and cooperation ⁴⁶⁰¹⁹ between NATO and the KLA during the war in Kosovo?

A. Who else could have such knowledge but me? That is to say that I was on the border with Albania all the time, where the greatest attacks came from, where the sorties took place directly, and also where the land forces entered. So they did act in concert; the forces of NATO, the forces of Albania, and the terrorists. It went on all the time, and it was excellently organised.

I'm saying this to you on the basis of the fact that I was personally present there throughout the war. I received reports from the subordinates from my own units, I received orders and information from superior commands. After all, this is confirmed, corroborated from my own documents. I can quote from my own tabs that you admitted into evidence and that you have not mentioned so far during your direct examination, where you can see that there was coordinated action between the NATO Air Force, the Albanian armed forces, and the terrorists, those who were attacking from Albania as well as who were attacking our territory in-depth.

Q. Which tabs do you have in mind?

A. First of all, the combat reports. If I'm not mistaken, that is tab 2.

You can have a look at page 189.

JUDGE BONOMY: Did we not have evidence about this two days ago, or was that Mr. Djosan? It's confusing when there are two witnesses at the same time. But we've had very recent evidence about activity from the Albanian side of the border in conjunction with NATO. ⁴⁶⁰²⁰

MR. NICE: I think Your Honour has in mind this witness's evidence, and I think it may be a question when the witness was asked whether the action of which he was speaking was from within the territory of Kosovo or from the territory of Albania, and I think it was this witness who gave the answer.

JUDGE BONOMY: We've been over the whole issue of the link between NATO, Albanian forces, and the KLA already in this witness's evidence. I have a distinct impression, and I noted it the last day, that we were going over territory repeatedly with this witness. He's already been before us for almost three times the projected time that his evidence would take. It's almost as if he's here to fill in time rather than to make progress with the case.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, bring the examination to a close. You're now marking time. We're not making any progress.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Colonel, there is evidence of that in your combat reports. This cooperation and coordination, is it undoubted from the point of view of your personal experience and the reports that you received and that you communicated?

A. Absolutely on the basis of my personal experience, Mr. Milosevic.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, it's now becoming counter-productive. Leading leading leading questions. Mr. Nice.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. All right. ⁴⁶⁰²¹

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Have you --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Do you still have other questions?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I'm putting the question right now, Mr. Robinson. You said that I shouldn't put the question that I had put any more, so I'm putting another one.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's a leading question, and I'm beginning to form the view, Mr. Milosevic, that we are in that stage of your examination-in-chief when you're merely repeating yourself.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm at the very end, Mr. Robinson, the very end.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you mention all the examples from your zone, or at least the majority of examples from your zone when NATO targeted civilian objectives?

A. Not before this Court. I can give them.

JUDGE BONOMY: With a question like that, we're in danger of being here for the remaining hundred hours of your evidence. You've surely got to focus the witness's attention on specific events if you're going to conduct a satisfactory examination of him.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Colonel, I'm talking about the targeting of civilian objectives by NATO. Did NATO do more harm to civilian or military --

JUDGE BONOMY: What's the relevance of yet another question on that subject when we've had a great deal of evidence from this witness ⁴⁶⁰²² about the targeting of civilians by NATO and the fact that the bombing led to the civilians moving out? What more can he say on the subject?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, that's just what I've asked him, what you said just now, Mr. Robinson [sic], what else he can say on that subject, because it's a very important subject. If there's nothing else he can say, then I will only refers to tabs 4 and 5 that Mr. Nice indicated as of being of minor importance. That is the notebook of received telegrams and the notebook of sent telegrams. Mr. Robinson, I'm just trying to have this admitted into evidence. I'm just trying to lay a foundation for that.

MR. NICE: The Court will remember that these two tabs were not dealt with by the accused in his questioning by any question that indicated their relevance, and I think it was His Honour Judge Kwon who observed that. Thus, they weren't admitted into evidence at the time and we moved on.

Whether there is any ground now for finding relevance in them, I rather doubt.

JUDGE ROBINSON: He may be able to establish a basis. We will allow you to put a question, a specific question on that subject.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please look at the log of received telegrams. Just a few examples. Say page 23, on the left-hand side. You have the report of the 2nd -- the commander of the 2nd Motorised Unit, and this has to do with a soldier who had committed a crime. ⁴⁶⁰²³

A. Just a minute, please. Let me find this. Yes. What can be seen here is the command of the 2nd Motorised Company on the 20th of May is submitting information that a soldier nicknamed Brzi, born on --

Q. You don't have to go into all this detail.

A. Yes, but Mr. Milosevic, in order to make things clear you have to look at the two logs along parallel lines.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just answer the question and let us move on.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... 2 in the English.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Sorry, I didn't hear that, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Page 32 in the English.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Colonel, on page 23 is there a report of the 2nd Motorised Company?

A. Yes.

Q. And then on page 16 of outgoing telegrams, is there a telegram stating that the details of that soldier are being requested? Because it's only his nickname that was known until then.

A. Just a moment, please. I'm not very good with all these papers. Could you please repeat the page in the log of outgoing telegrams?

Q. 16, to the right.

A. Yes. The command of the 2nd Motorised Battalion, on the 20th of May, seeks the details of the soldier nicknamed Brzi who had committed many serious crimes. Nezmic Nenad [phoen], lieutenant, is the person who signed this. He was in charge of security in my battalion.

Q. And among the telegrams received, the report of the commander? ⁴⁶⁰²⁴

A. Exactly, that he found him immediately. You can even see the time here, if you look at page 16, at 12.10. That's when it was sent.

JUDGE BONOMY: It would be of more interest to know what the crimes were.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can tell you that too. The crime was rape. So it was two soldiers who fled from the position, went to the town of Prizren, they broke into a house, where people lived, of course.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you very much. That's enough for my purposes. Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right --

MR. NICE: I don't know if it has been translated. I haven't been able to find it.

JUDGE KWON: Page 34.

MR. NICE: Of the outgoing.

JUDGE KWON: Of tab 5. In the middle.

MR. NICE: That's the 10th of May, in the middle.

JUDGE KWON: But delivered on the 20th.

MR. NICE: Yes, I see. Thank you very much.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Look at the telegrams received, please. Page 31, towards the bottom. The 25th of May, the commander of the 2nd Company, that he had a soldier brought into custody. The log of telegrams received. ⁴⁶⁰²⁵

A. Yes. He states here that he brought into custody yet another soldier, and he's asking the security officer to come and fetch him. This is another soldier who, together with this other one called Brzi, took part in the commission of that crime.

In all fairness I don't have their criminal reports because they are not kept by units, but I have the documents from the war court, and I know for sure that they were brought before a war court and sentenced.

Q. On page 32, that's the next page immediately, it's the report of the 26th of May.

A. Exactly. This soldier who was at the company command, probably no one from the brigade could have come, so he took -- he had him sent to Prizren, to the military police organs.

Q. Thank you. Page 29.

A. Yes.

Q. The log of received telegrams. The combat control of the territory. And to the right you have Colonel Delic's order on the command of the territory.

A. Could I just have a reference, please? Yes. I found it now.

Q. The report of the commander of the 2nd Company, and then on the right-hand side you have --

A. Exactly. On the 22nd of May, the commander of that company reported that he carried out the combat control of the territory, and he says what happened to the terrorists, and the equipment that he captured, and he also had certain proposals. I immediately informed the brigade commander. I could not do it immediately, though, because the company ⁴⁶⁰²⁶ commander informed me during the night. But on the 23rd I sent my report, and I think that you have it also in the log of telegrams that were sent out.

And then immediately on the 23rd, the brigade commander sent to all units in the brigade an order which shows that there are still active terrorists within our combat deployment, and he gives orders to the units to take measures in order to protect themselves from terrorist actions. And on the following page, he commends a unit that had successfully carried out the combat control of the territory.

Q. Colonel, on the basis of these telegrams can a conclusion be drawn on the communication between you as the commander of this command group with the company commanders and the commander of the brigade or, rather, can we see different events linked up and the mode of command as far as concrete things are concerned?

A. Mr. Milosevic, this is precisely what I wished to explain through the question of functioning of the command and control system. I only wanted to talk about the tactical level where I was, but I was not permitted to do so.

However, this is an obvious example of that, that all reports from subordinate units come to me, and then on the basis of all those reports, I report to my superior command and the command immediately works on certain documents and takes steps in order to improve the command and basically to carry out combat tasks, namely the defence of the country against the aggressor -- from the aggressor.

Q. Thank you, Colonel. Just a few things from the log of outgoing ⁴⁶⁰²⁷ telegrams. We already identified one on page 16 where this corresponds to the measures taken vis-a-vis perpetrators of crimes. Please look at page 23, on the left-hand side: Order to the commander of the 2nd Motorised Company to use forces. And please look at the log of received telegrams on page 35, higher up.

A. Just a moment, please.

Q. So page 23, to the left.

A. Yes.

Q. And in the log of telegrams received, page 35, the proposal of the company commander.

A. Yes.

Q. So how does this process evolve? What can we see on the basis of this? What does the commander of the company propose? Whose approval does he seek? Does he receive approval ultimately? What is this all about?

A. This company commander - I'm going to remind you of tab 6 - received my order, and what happened here was something unexpected. Namely, that the land forces -- the land Operation Arrow started from Pastrik and it threatened my left flank. So the company commander asks me for approval to change combat deployment in that sense where I did not order him to act that way. That is to show that he could not change a single element without receiving my approval, my consent. Of course, on the same day I saw what the situation was and I personally went to see the commander. But although I personally went to see the commander, I had to give orders in writing as well, granting ^{46028 BLANK PAGE 46029} approval to change positions partially. And that was originally the proposal of the company commander because he was a sensible man, a clever man. And you can see in this way the chain of command in the military as well.

Q. So he cannot change a single element of the combat order without your approval, and you cannot change a single element in your combat order without the approval of the commander brigade -- brigade commander, and he without the approval of the corps commander.

A. Exactly. The rules of conduct are very clear on this, when a military person can use a unit independently. And that is to say if there was a direct attack against that unit, first he's going to use the unit and then he's going report to his commander. In all other cases, it is precisely the way you had put it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, just a second. What do you say that all this evidence goes to show, this evidence about the command structure that you have been leading? What are you seeking to establish by it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Seeking -- I'm seeking to establish how the army functions on a tactical level of the kind commanded by Colonel Vukovic. So on the basis of documents, a logbook of outgoing and incoming telegrams, you can see that there is no possibility for the army even to be moved without an order issued, and that every order issued must be completely clear. And it shows the dynamics of the change in position or certain actions undertaken by the army. And also, it shows the ⁴⁶⁰³⁰ reactions, what the reaction is if, for example, a soldier happens to have committed a crime. He can be in a watchtower on the border, they find him, take him into custody, and so on.

JUDGE ROBINSON: All of this assumes that the army is acting in accordance with those rules.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It doesn't assume. It proves that the army acts in accordance with those rules. It proves how and shows how orders are issued and how they are executed and so on.

JUDGE ROBINSON: In my view what it proves is that you have something written in a particular document which says that the army must act in a particular way, but surely it doesn't prove that in actual fact the army acted in that way.

It's this emphasis on form that is in your case that I don't understand.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think, Mr. Robinson, with all due respect, that you didn't understand this point. We're not talking and dealing with regulations at all here, and rules. We're dealing with specific actions and acts which are expressed through this telegram having been committed or having been ordered and orders carried out. So we're talking about concrete material facts here about what was going on in the field.

These logbooks of incoming and outgoing telegrams reflect the events on the ground, on the terrain, not the rules and regulations. We know all about rules and regulations and we've been through them. But these incoming and outgoing telegrams demonstrate what actually happened, ⁴⁶⁰³¹ what was going on.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. Milosevic. Let us try to conclude this witness's examination-in-chief.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May these exhibits 4 and 5 be admitted into evidence, Mr. Robinson, now, please?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, do you have anything on this?

MR. NICE: No observation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll admit them, yes.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Just three short questions. Colonel, did the members of your unit ever commit war crimes; and, if so, what steps did you take?

A. I've already said that there were two cases, two incidents that happened. In all those cases -- or both those cases an on-site investigation was carried out, and since the unit was directly exposed to air force action, the military investigating judge did not go out on the spot but the investigation was carried out by units of the military police assigned to do so, along with a criminal report filed, and the person was given over to a court-martial.

Q. Except for those two examples, did you have any other example of any member your unit committing any crimes?

A. No, Mr. Milosevic, we had no such instances.

Q. Thank you. Now, in your area of defence, were there any villages - and if so, how many - where the population did not move out at all, either to other areas of Kosovo and Metohija or the Republic of Albania? ⁴⁶⁰³²

A. Well, there were seven or eight of them in the combat deployment area of my unit.

Q. We're talking about villages that didn't move at all, there was no movement.

A. Yes, that's right. Those villages, there was no movement of the population in those villages. They stayed on throughout the time we were there and even later on when we left.

Q. And what was the activities of your platoon for the protection of the civilian population?

A. The basic task was the following: To inform -- provide information about airstrikes and the consequences of the airstrikes, of the NATO Air Force on the civilians. We had a lot to do pursuant to that particular assignment. And if you want me to, I can go into that greater detail. And there was the prevention of any abuse and irregular action on the part of army members vis-a-vis the civilian population. And wherever there were examples of such misbehaviour the Intervention Platoon intervened or, rather, the platoon intervened and uncovered the perpetrators or acted to prevent further action of that kind. And the head of that platoon, the commander of the platoon, was my security officer, who among other things, was in charge of matters of that kind too.

Q. Thank you, Colonel.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no further questions, Mr. Robinson, for this witness.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic. ⁴⁶⁰³³ Mr. Nice.

Cross-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. In a sentence, please, what were you and your troops doing in the area of Celine, Bela Crkva, Mala Krusa between the 25th of March and the 1st of April, 1999?

A. From the 25th of March to the 28th of March I was located in this area. I've talked at length about that. We were engaged in an anti-terrorist operation. From the 28th of March until the 1st of April, I wasn't there at all. I wasn't in that area at all.

Q. The first three days an anti-terrorist operation. How would you describe it, in a sentence?

A. I don't understand what you're asking me.

Q. Well, were you attacking them?

A. I've spoken about that sufficiently. There was action only where the terrorists shot at my unit, or shot at other units, for that matter.

Q. So you were, as it were, not taking an initiative against the terrorists of any kind. You were simply passive, waiting for them to fire at you and you'd shoot back; is that right?

A. No. You're distorting what I've been saying, Mr. Nice. The army does not just pass by in an operation of this kind such as the fight and combat against terrorists. And I've already said that that was one of the most complex combat operations; assumes positions at the blockade line and searches the terrain. It is not passing through. It is a combat operation that is undertaken where the terrorists were active.

Q. Of course, you pass through Bela Crkva because there were no KLA ⁴⁶⁰³⁴ there. That's correct, isn't it?

A. According to our information, there were no members of the terrorist organisation, the Kosovo Liberation Army members, there. There were no hostile -- there was no hostile action towards the army, and the army had no need to go into operation there.

Q. And so the other villages, it was a question of blockading and searching; is that correct?

A. Well, the object was to block off a certain area, to effect a blockade and to uncover and destroy the Siptar terrorist forces --

Q. Destroy?

A. -- and to block the communication lines, the roads.

Q. Just a minute. I'm very interested in your use of words, you see? And we've only got them in the translation, but you can find the originals. Blockade, search, and now you've explained that the function, where they were found, was to destroy them. So there's no question, for example, of arresting terrorists, as you would describe the KLA to be.

A. Mr. Nice, that's what you think. I am truly sorry that you can't understand what I'm telling you. And you don't understand it for the simple reason because you don't have the elementary, basic --

Q. Please be as offensive to me as you think is helpful to the cause you're serving, but you will save time if you answer my questions. Now, I'm going to go back and I'm going to ask you the question once more, and this time would you be good enough to answer the question and not launch into what may be, I suggest to you, a prepared method of replying to my questions. ⁴⁶⁰³⁵ Now, then, I've asked a simple question. You've explained that the function was to destroy them, and the question was: There's no question of arresting terrorists, as you would describe the KLA to be. Am I right?

A. No, you're not right, and you're not listening to what I'm saying. Mr. Nice, I cannot give simple answers to your questions because your questions are complicated ones. Furthermore, I don't know English, so I can't read the transcript, but I do know what I said, and this is what I said: A blockade, a search, breaking up, or destruction, which means to break up the enemy. Breaking up, "razbiti," means to make it impossible for them to act in one way or another.

Now, for you to be able to understand that, you must have elementary military knowledge of military terminology. And I can tell you about that because I was a teacher. I taught military terminology for a long time, tactics for a long time.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... and your evidence has already taken eight hours, approximately, to give. I've asked you to give a simple explanation of what you were doing, and we've gone through various terms, and we came to uncover and destroy. It may be the same terms, differently translated the second time; breaking up or destroying. So these are your terms, Mr. Vukovic.

Now, tell us, please, were any terrorists arrested? Terrorists as you describe them to be. Were any arrested?

A. In this anti-terrorist operation, to the best my knowledge there were no terrorists arrested. ⁴⁶⁰³⁶

Q. How many alleged terrorists were killed?

A. You can see that from the analysis. It is our assumption that about 80 were, although I say that never along my axis of movement did I encounter the corpses. I told you that.

Q. Did your --

A. There were a lot of traces of blood but not actual corpses.

Q. Did your own troops kill any people you say were terrorists?

A. All I'm saying is that my unit fought terrorists. I cannot say whether it killed them or not.

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. And the basic goal was to break them up, but you don't understand this notion of breaking up, "razbiti."

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I need to be clear about this: Is the witness saying that when he used the word "destroy," he used it in the sense of breaking up?

MR. NICE:

Q. Could you answer His Honour, please?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's it exactly, Mr. Robinson. It means to neutralise their effects, their action. Not physically to kill, not physically to kill.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. You say that -- and again I'm just reading back to you your words. That's why we have short questions and answers. It sometimes helps. "I'm saying," you said, "is that my unit fought terrorists. I ⁴⁶⁰³⁷ cannot say whether it killed them or not." That's your answer. If troops in your unit did kill or think they had killed terrorists, would they report that to you or through the chain of command to you?

A. Certainly at all events had they found the bodies, the corpses, they would have had to have informed me of that.

Q. And there would be, would there, a regular written reporting mechanism whereby a soldier says: "Encountered so many terrorists or so many people who seemed to be terrorists in village X, they engaged me in a fight and I killed them all -- I believe I killed two or three of them." Is that what happens? You tell us.

A. Well, that's something that doesn't happen because a soldier doesn't write a written report, a written statement. And anyway, I was saying that the army was very -- the soldiers were very -- it was very infrequent that the soldiers were alone. They would always have a commanding officer with them. And had you read the order by the brigade commander carefully, you would see the procedure in this particular case, the procedure with respect to the clearing up of the battlefield, the "asanacija" of the battlefield.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, this is a day when we have to stop at 1.43.

MR. NICE: Very well.

Q. Can you help me with three very short procedural -- not procedural, practical matters. The telegrams, in and out, that we've now looked at, tabs 4 and 5, they are written. In what form did they arrive ⁴⁶⁰³⁸ as -- in order to be written out in the way we see? In what form did they arrive? In what form were they sent?

A. There's a small device which is called the UKP2, and you connect it to an RUP20 or 20K device. I don't know whether you know about these devices, whether it's clear that I'm saying, and the operator working with that computer when he sends out a telegram -- it's a primitive device, actually, and it's a slow process.

Q. Very well. You receive no printed copy and somebody has to write it out in hand; is that right?

A. Yes, that's exactly it. The operator on duty at the time at the communications centre writes it in on a piece of paper and brings it to me to see. And that's the kind of device that was used.

Q. We have the full records of your unit for the relevant period?

A. No, not the full record, Mr. Nice. Of these incoming and outgoing -- there were many logbooks of incoming and outgoing telegrams. They were kept in 1998 as well.

Q. Where's the one that covers the period the 25th of March and until the beginning of April? Because all we have for outgoing -- I beg your pardon, for incoming is something that starts on the 26th of April, and all we have for outgoing is a single entry for the 19th of February and then entries for the 20th of April. So where are the ones that cover the period in which we are particularly interested, the 25th of March to the end of March? Where are they?

A. Well, had you let me finish, I would have told you that too. If you look, you can notice that there are some pages missing. And I've ⁴⁶⁰³⁹ already said that my office at the barracks was directly hit and that most of or the largest portion of the documents for 1998 were destroyed. The command post was hit with a direct hit three times. And among other things, it was during that action, NATO strikes to be precise, it was during that -- as a result of those NATO strikes that a large number of documents were destroyed.

Q. Finally --

A. Truth to tell, I'm surprised that this has remained.

Q. Finally, as a matter of records, tab 2 you've told us about, we have now been provided with a fuller version of tab 2. Is this an original and complete document, the fuller version we've been provided with? It's an original document.

A. You will have to let me see it to tell you whether it is the original and complete document. What I have here before me is the original, because I can see the signatures, I can see the dates. I remember the actual occurrence.

Q. And this is a document kept by whom?

A. It's the daily report pursuant to instructions about the work of commands and staffs, and it is the deputy battalion commander who keeps them, signed by the battalion commander himself. So it was compiled by my deputy, I signed it. And if I am absent from the command post, then when a report is to be sent out, it is signed by my deputy.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I'm sorry to interrupt but we have to adjourn now.

We will resume tomorrow at 9.00 a.m. ⁴⁶⁰⁴⁰

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 1st day

of November, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.