⁴⁶⁵⁸⁹

Wednesday, 16 November 2005

[Open session]

[The witness entered court]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's hear Mr. Kay first.

MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honours. Considering matters yesterday on the issue of the accused's health and the apparent hearing problem that he has at the moment, it occurred to us that a system that used to be used in the trial so that he could hear the sound was that there were a couple of speakers on his desk by which he was able to listen to the evidence in whatever language it was, and it's apparent from the reports that the direct sound into his ear chamber from ear pieces are obviously exacerbating the situation.

The technical booth had to take away that audio system because, during the stage of the trial when we had protected witnesses, it was able to be heard in other parts of the court what was coming from those speakers. We don't have that issue in the Defence case with the protected witnesses, and it occurs to us that it might alleviate his discomfort and help matters for him if he was willing to undergo this new system of having the speakers back on his table, with an appropriate volume so that he could hear the evidence. Apparently the technical booth are able to do this but would require an approval by the Trial Chamber in introducing such a modification.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, that's very interesting. ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁰

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you heard what Mr. Kay said. What are your views on that?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, first and foremost, this is but a trifle. It is but a trifle among all the health problems that I have. Certainly it could do no harm. It could only help me because it is true that the headphones bother me a lot. However, this ear, nose, and throat subject is the least of my health problems.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Do you wish us to consider that, to try to implement it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, by all means. That would help matters. But I'm just telling you that this is an unimportant matter.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll consider it. Mr. Nice, please.

WITNESS: ZLATKO ODAK [Resumed]

[Witness answered through interpreter] Cross-examined by Mr. Nice: [Continued]

Q. Yesterday, you, when dealing with the proposition that the events in Djakovica had been recorded in other collections of evidence, you made an observation that if the source was a veteran of the KLA, and it came out as Mr. Oker and then you referred to Mr. Walker. What were you doing suggesting that Mr. Walker was a veteran of the KLA? ⁴⁶⁵⁹¹

A. Mr. Nice, I'm not the one who is saying it. That's what members of the terrorist organisation of the KLA said.

Q. Are you sure you're not confusing what you'd been prepared to say adverse to Holbrooke or General Clark about being veterans with what you were being told to say about Mr. Walker, against whom has never been suggested is a veteran of the KLA?

A. Well, I was not prepared to say anything, Mr. Nice, but possibly I myself made a mistake.

Q. Let's look at that book "As Seen, As Told." What access to that book were you given by either the committee of experts or by Mr. Djosan or by anyone else?

A. I read only the parts of that book that pertain to Djakovica. That was about three years ago, a bit less.

Q. Who gave you the book or parts of the book?

A. General Djosan.

Q. And did you acquaint yourself with the methodology of the book and the fact that it was prepared on the basis of individual witness statements taken from other people?

A. No. I didn't read other parts. I only read the parts that pertained to Djakovica, as I said.

Q. Did you make yourself aware of the methodology by which the book had been prepared?

A. No, Mr. Nice. I'm not interested.

Q. Well, you make observations about the falsity and inaccuracy of the book. Did you look to the book to see the degree to which it also ⁴⁶⁵⁹² covered bad things done by the KLA? Did you do that?

A. As far as I know, from what I talked about with my friends and acquaintances, in the first part of that book there is no mention whatsoever of KLA crimes.

Q. I see. Well, let's look at just a passage of it. We don't have time to go through it in detail, but if we can just look at one passage on this book, which is -- I forget the exhibit number. 106. In the English if we can look at page 172, and we'll bring you the B/C/S equivalent. I only want you to look at two passages, or consider two passages with us. The first on the left hand -- Mr. Prendergast, it's on the left-hand side of page 173. That's it. Correct. The beginning of NATO -- if you can find this passage, please, there is a paragraph that begins: "The beginning of NATO airstrikes against the FRY on the 24th of March triggered an immediate intensification of the violence and destruction in the centre of Djakovica, in the course of which many houses were burned, shops looted, and Kosovo Albanians killed. During the night, police officers and paramilitaries set the old market quarter on fire. Some of the paramilitaries present were described as wearing camouflage uniforms with a tiger's face on the sleeve patches. Local residents also identified local Serbs and 'Gypsies' as participating in shooting directly into the houses of Kosovo Albanian residents. Tanks, trucks, and heavy artillery were seen in the town."

This comes from a different collection of evidence. What do you say about that? Every sentence false?

A. During those first days, all the vehicles had not been out of the ⁴⁶⁵⁹³ barracks yet, and I took them to the regions where the battalion units were deployed. Every day I went through the centre of town and by this locality that you refer to. However, I did not notice any such thing, and my subordinates did not report to me that they had seen something like that either.

Q. Mr. Odak, you were the senior military person in the town at the time. Here is an account that makes reference to paramilitaries, dreadful event burning the old market quarter, looting of shops. Is it possible it was done and you didn't know about it because you were engaged in other work, or is it your evidence that this account must be false? I just want to know what your position is.

A. There must have been crime, like in any war, but as far as I follow this, the organs of the Ministry of the Interior, as well as members of the military department, had the duty to provide security for shops and businesses. There must have been crime, and that has to be condemned and the perpetrators have to be brought to justice, but these were probably just individual cases.

Q. If you're now saying it's possible that right at that first day there was crime committed by individuals to the extent of burning the market and looting the shops, can you help us, please, with what was done, to your knowledge, if anything, to bring the perpetrators to justice.

A. First of all, it's not that I said that this happened on the first day. The war lasted three months. It could have happened on any other day too. I personally am not aware of these things because it's not my job. This was done by the Ministry of the Interior. They brought into ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁴ custody all the persons who were caught committing a crime.

Q. Well, if you can point us to any record of any person who committed a crime in the form of looting or burning Djakovica in that time of March, please do so. But let's look at the right-hand side of the same page, just to deal with a point of evidence that you've already given. Please find the paragraph that begins like this: "From the 25th of March, hundreds of local residents moved out to the villages surrounding Djakovica, going especially to Raca, Moglica, Meja in the hills to the west of the town where, at the same time, many IDPs arrived in escorted columns from villages further west --" Internally displaced persons, I beg your pardon, "... arrived in escorted columns from villages further west near the Albanian border. Some also moved to houses in Brekovac, the Gypsy neighbourhood of Djakovica, which they considered to be safer. An interviewee saw the VJ moving from their barracks into the compound of San Antonio Catholic church."

Well, now, I actually read passages out of order but I'll come back to the other passage I wanted to look at. On this passage, is this movement of residents correctly described?

A. First of all, Mr. Nice, in response to your first question, there were no criminal cases in my unit and I never had any such cases. Had I had such cases, I would have taken measures against the perpetrators, measures envisaged by law, that is. You cannot ask me to provide such documents because that is not my job, to bring criminals into custody. You can ask the organs of the Ministry of the Interior for that, not me. As for the movements of the population, I referred to that ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁵ yesterday too. People sought shelter where they thought they'd be safer.

Q. Is the account accurate? Just yes or no.

A. Well, I cannot give a mere yes or no answer, Mr. Nice. Many inhabitants, especially in areas where the terrorists were, left these areas and went to where they felt safer, like the town of Djakovica. I know that many inhabitants went to Moglica, Raca, Petrusa.

Q. Very well. Is it right --

A. Also there were people in Brekovac too, yes.

Q. Is it right that the VJ moved into the barracks at the Catholic church in Djakovica?

A. Mr. Nice, that facility that borders on the barracks, there is only a wall in between, well, practically we were neighbours for many years, almost 20 years. We had excellent relations with them. I do not recall what the name of the prior of the monastery is. I think it's Father Lovre, or something like that. At the request of my commander, Colonel Djosan, I went to him because we had people who were seriously wounded. And in terms of logistics, I thought it would be best if we could temporarily put them up there. The gentleman I mentioned accepted that. We promised that we would not bring anything in or, rather, that we would not bring any weapons in. That is a monastery. It's not a church. The church is about 50 metres away.

We asked them to take all their valuables out, which they did, and when we left the building after about ten days, when we returned to our own premises, and even the commander respected that and did not bring weapons into the building -- ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁶

Q. We'll see a little more about that later.

A. -- because -- because --

Q. It's right, isn't it, that the VJ was seeking the protection of a church building? Did that seem to you to accord with the principles of war, for the army to seek the protection of church buildings?

A. Mr. Nice, the army did not seek any protection in that building. That's where the army put up its most seriously wounded men, because carrying them further away would have been crazy and impossible at the time. What mattered the most to us were the lives of our soldiers.

Q. Looking at the end of the previous paragraph, which I'll take shortly, having dealt with the movement of people in the town, it says: "They generally went to relatives or friends in other parts of the town, or to villages in the nearby hills, so that about half of the population remained in the town at the end of the NATO bombing, according to local estimates (as compared with other towns in Kosovo, including Pec, which were virtually emptied.)"

Now, this part of the report is something you definitely accept as accurate, isn't it, because it matches your own evidence, that half the people were left in Djakovica. Yes?

A. No. I didn't say that anybody left Djakovica. I don't have such information, no.

Q. Can we look, please -- sorry.

A. I didn't say that half of the population remained in Djakovica. I said that the population of Djakovica had probably doubled by the end of the war. ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁷

Q. Very well. Let's look at D321, tab 30, one of your statements to the commission, just so that I can understand something that isn't quite clear from your evidence.

You were the commander of this anti-aircraft logistics unit, as you've told us, but in fact, as tab 30 reveals, if we can place it on the overhead projector, according to this of your three statements, and it's not the same as in the other two, at least not the same as in one of the other ones certainly, you formed an intervention company yourself; is that right?

A. The information provided is the same in all statements. There is no difference. Yes, on orders from Colonel Djosan, my commander, because the forward command post of the Pristina Corps and -- well, there were no other units that could intervene if the population were to be attacked by terrorists, and then he ordered me to -- he -- people who guarded the deployment of the units, he ordered me to set up a company that would intervene if the terrorists would attack, and that had to do with everything I mentioned previously.

Q. Yes. And you actually headed and led that unit, did you?

A. Yes.

Q. So that if any military unit -- and we can see this from the next part of the paragraph, where it says, "The company had a platoon base composition; a command, a communication section, and three platoons. I was the company commander, I was the only officer with an infantry speciality. The weapons the company had were infantry weapons."

Q. So it follows that if any military in Djakovica were committing ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁸ crimes, cleansing parts of Djakovica, they were acting under your command; is that correct?

A. Mr. Nice, that's not correct. You are turning things upside down. I said the unit had been established in order to intervene in the event of a terrorist attack, and it was used only once. It was used only during a blockade in the course of an anti-terrorist operation that was carried in the area of Meja, Pacaj, Racaj and other villages. It was very difficult to put together that unit because other parts of our forces remained short of security once I put that unit together.

And once, on one occasion when I was absent for two days, the rest of the unit had to be secured by soldiers who had not been trained for the job, and that put the whole unit in danger.

Q. Let me just make the question clearer, I hope, from another -- perhaps in another form. Remember we saw all that damage done to Djakovica yesterday on the video? Do you remember that?

A. Yes. NATO bombs.

Q. Now, you know I've reviewed for you very briefly through one witness, a girl's statement and through a passage from a book by Human Rights Watch, there's an enormous amount of evidence that people were killed and cleansed from Djakovica. Now, my question is this: Was there any other armed unit apart from yours capable, in Djakovica, of doing either, A, the damage to the buildings that we saw; or B, the cleansing by force of the people from Djakovica and the killing of people in Djakovica? Was there any other armed unit apart from your intervention unit?

A. First of all, Mr. Nice, people in Djakovica were not killed or ⁴⁶⁵⁹⁹ cleansed. That is a blatant lie.

Q. [Previous translation continues] ... just one minute.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I was just wondering if there isn't any technical expertise available that would be able to assess the cause of the damage to the building, whether it was from an aerial bomb or an infantry artillery.

MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour, you've had some evidence on that and I'm going to come to that as my next question to this witness.

JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. Yes.

MR. NICE:

Q. Can you help us, please, with my question. Was there any other armed unit, apart from the intervention group that you led, capable of damaging the buildings or capable of going to people's houses and killing them and driving them out by force, any other unit in Djakovica?

A. Mr. Nice, my unit, first of all, did not have such a purpose. It was not meant for combat at all. It was meant to provide logistics, to supply food, fuel, ammunition, to take care of the wounded, et cetera. That was our main task. And the only time it was engaged, it was engaged during the blockade in the anti-terrorist action near Meja. So it could not have been used for any other purpose nor was it used.

Q. Djakovica is a substantial town but it's not huge. Can you point -- was there any other unit - police, military, paramilitary - that you now allow could have been killing people, driving them from their homes, or destroying these buildings?

A. I have to repeat that nobody killed people or burned houses. ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁰ Apart from my unit, I've already said there was a signals unit that catered to the command of the brigade. And as for police units, I don't know how many of them there were. I'm certain there were no paramilitary units.

Q. Let's look at the last part of your statement where you deal with Racaj, where you deal with the seal-off line on the 25th of April. There's been a great deal of evidence, and the accused reviewed it to some degree, showing that people were driven from Racaj. Do you say that that is simply untrue or do you say, "It's possible that some other unit got in there and drove people out but it wasn't my unit"? What's your position?

A. It's not true that people were driven out. I explained to you the methods of the terrorists and how they operated. They expelled the population of villages themselves in order to make it look as if they had been expelled by the army. That happened from 1998 onwards until the end of the war. They always applied the same method because people never fled from areas where there were no terrorists or the army.

Q. I mean, this is your account, for which you've got no contemporaneous piece of paper in support; is that right? There's no document that supports this allegation of yours coming from 1998, 1999?

A. I don't have any such thing, Mr. Nice. But unlike you, I was down there and I saw it.

Q. Let me see if I understand your suggestion. What your suggestion is is this: That the KLA go to a village and drive the people out, and they, what, burn the houses down, and the poor villagers are then left in ⁴⁶⁶⁰¹ the woods, and what do they do next to make it look as though it was the army that did it? I've lost that bit. Perhaps you could help me.

A. Mr. Nice, you misunderstood completely. What I said was this: When terrorists come to a village, they perform forced mobilisation. They make people buy weapons. They sold rifles at a price of 200 to 300 Deutschmark at a time. They set up checkpoints around the village. They order the populace to dig trenches and roads around the village to create an appearance that the village is defending itself although it's not being attacked. Then they attack the army, and when the army responds, they order the population to leave the village, and they thus make it look that the army is driving away the villagers, whereas it is only combat between them and the army. That is the whole essence of the method in Kosovo. Judging by what I saw, and I saw a lot while I was in Kosovo as part of the combat group, they applied the same method throughout Kosovo.

Q. [Previous translation continues] ... from the beginning to make it look like a terrible army attack on the innocent villagers, the innocent villagers of course being well aware of exactly what was happening to them. Is that your account?

A. I can only repeat, Mr. Nice: The villagers -- the inhabitants of those villages that had not been visited by terrorists never fled. They had no reason to flee from the army nor did they do it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Lieutenant Colonel, the people to whom they are doing this are by and large of their own ethnicity?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that -- is that strange? ⁴⁶⁶⁰²

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those are ethnic Albanians.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Isn't that strange?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Mr. Robinson, it's not strange. It's not the ideology that prevailed, it's force. They made people do what they wanted by force, not by winning them over to their own ideology. They had no problem killing their own fellow citizens who did not think as they did, who did not share their opinions, because there were those who were loyal to the state of Yugoslavia.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE:

Q. Before I turn to the topic of damage that His Honour raised a little earlier and to which we were moving in any event, let me just put my position to you quite clearly. Mr. Odak, you, like all sorts of other company and battalion commanders, were caught up in events in a way that meant either you instructed or allowed the men you commanded to commit crimes, knowing that they would go unpunished because they served the objectives of your political leaders, including this accused. That's what happened, isn't it?

A. That is completely untrue, and it's a major insinuation on your part, and I absolutely forbid you to insult my colleagues who fought bravely and courageously for their own country.

Q. You are incapable now of explaining the death which led to mass grave in Djakovica, to the destruction and the cleansing of that town in part, because it's actually your responsibility. You know it, and you've got to come to this Court to lie about it. That's the truth, isn't it? ⁴⁶⁶⁰³

A. Mr. Nice, I am enthralled by your gentlemanly conduct but I will not stoop to your level. What you are saying is a blatant lie from beginning to end. I spent all my time in Djakovica performing the tasks I received from my superiors. In the initial period, while I was in the 52nd Brigade, those tasks had to do with the supply of units, and I performed my tasks with responsibility. Those who tried to commit any crimes in our brigade were turned over to the authorities, that is the military police, and measures were taken against them.

Q. [Previous translation continues] ... me, or tell the Court what's happened to them since.

A. Mr. Nice, I was not part of the command of the brigade. I was a battalion commander. Those soldiers were not from my unit. They were from some artillery battalion. I don't know which. We were informed of those cases by our brigade commander.

Q. All right. Let's look at --

A. It's not our job to deal with that.

Q. [Previous translation continues] ... please, which is the report of the expert Mr. Riedlmayer. And first of all, I'll take you, please, through a couple of passages of the written report and then we'll look at the photographs and material that he analysed relating to Djakovica in particular. Can we look at -- I'm afraid this is only in English. It's in the report which is Exhibit 88, and it's at paragraph 2.1. If that can be placed on the overhead projector, I'll read certain passages out and seek your comments.

You see, we have had an expert in buildings give evidence, and he ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁴ explains, amongst other things, that: "A number of important historical and religious monuments and sites in Kosovo were alleged, by Yugoslav authorities and others, to have been destroyed or seriously damaged by NATO airstrikes ..." and he lists that Hadum Mosque complex in Djakovica as one of those where such an allegation was made. And the next paragraph goes on to say the following: "Of the above sites, not one was found to show any sign of damage attributable to an air attack. Some, including the Serbian Orthodox sites and several of the non-Serbian heritage sites ... were found to be completely intact." So here's an expert who's looked at the Hadum Mosque, compared it with the allegations that it was bombed, and said not at all, no sign of bomb attack.

Now, do you allow for the fact that the Hadum Mosque may, in the event, not have been bombed, because you weren't there, were you?

A. I wasn't there at the Hadum Mosque itself, but I have to say again that part of the town adjacent to Cabrat hill was bombed every day. The streets are very narrow. There is no space between houses. There are many houses near the mosque. I saw that many times when I looked from the hill. It is possible that the Hadum Mosque caught fire from the burning houses.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice -- [French on English channel] There's a problem with the interpretation. We'll start again.

MR. NICE:

Q. The next paragraph, just to deal with the accuracy of this expert's report, says this, second sentence: "St. Anthony's --" ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁵

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not on the transcript what I said because of the translation problem. I had said, "Mr. Nice, could you confirm that this expert only looked at cultural sites."

MR. NICE: That's indeed what he did.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. NICE:

Q. We now look at the next paragraph --

JUDGE KWON: Why don't you start from the beginning of that paragraph. It has mention of bazaar.

MR. NICE:

Q. "Others were damaged or destroyed, but the damage had clearly been done from the ground up (the Prizren League Museum, the Hadum Mosque complex, the historic bazaars in Pec and Djakovica) and not from the air. The St. Anthony's Catholic church in Gjakova had not been hit in the airstrikes, but it had been taken over and turned into a military facility by the Yugoslav Army."

Taking those points, then, the bazaar area, which we're going to look at on the following page, I think, is said by the expert to have been destroyed from the bottom up by being burnt. Do you allow for that to be correct?

A. No. I have no such knowledge.

Q. May it be right -- I'm giving you every opportunity, Mr. Odak, not to tie yourself to things of which you don't know. I've asked you about the involvement of the police, paramilitaries. May it be right that the bazaar was burnt by those intending on setting it afire? May that be ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁶ possible?

A. I'm saying again I know nothing about that. I have no such knowledge. I can't say whether it's possible or not.

Q. If we turn over the page, please, to paragraph 2.2. We see this paragraph: "Three out of four well-preserved historic urban centres in Kosovo suffered severe devastation during the spring of 1999 - Pec/Peja, Djakovica/Gjakova, and Vucitrn/Vushtrri. Despite allegations by the Yugoslav authorities, it was evident that from the nature of the damage that this destruction was not the result of aerial bombardment, but of fires set on the ground in individual buildings. Statements of eyewitnesses identified Serbian police, Yugoslav army troops, paramilitaries and, in some cases, Serb civilians as perpetrators of these attacks. These attacks appear to have been aimed at the destruction of buildings and cultural and religious monuments associated with Kosovo's Albanian population ..."

Is this expert wrong in his analysis? Tell us.

A. Mr. Nice, I think we are in a vicious circle. As for these buildings, a lot of buildings were hit by NATO bombs. It is possible that there were individual cases of torching. It is very possible. There was a war going on and such things happen in every war. However, we cannot say that if NATO bombs hit one building that it is impossible that other buildings caught fire from that. I'm telling you, the streets in that part of town are very narrow. There is no space between houses. One building often caught fire from another one that was burning. ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁷

Q. Let's look at one last passage. It's at page 9 in the bottom right-hand corner, it's at the end of paragraph 2.4. You see this expert has spoken to various people, provides footnotes from time to time to amplify his report, and he says this: "The Catholic church of St. Anthony in Pristina and St. Anthony's Catholic church and the adjacent Franciscan convent in Djakovica were occupied by Yugoslav army troops in the beginning of the NATO air war and were used as military facilities, a violation of the laws of war analogous to misuse of the Red Cross symbol." And then he says this of the Pristina church, which you may not be able to help with -- Did you go to Pristina? Do you know what happened in Pristina?

A. No, no, I don't know. I spent all the war in Djakovica.

Q. He says this: "In the case of the church in Djakovica, officers and troops from the nearby Yugoslav army base moved into the church, the parish house and the convent," and he quotes, "half an hour before the NATO bombing started," according to the parish priest. "The VJ ... ejected the priests and nuns and used the church buildings as a command centre for the following two months."

Now, is he right about that? It was your group that did it. The parish priest told the expert.

A. Mr. Nice, I have already told you about it. If I had had any intention to conceal anything, I would have simply kept mum about it. I told you that we asked prior and we got his approval. We went into the monastery with his consent and we returned it in good order. It was damaged by NATO bombs because it was adjacent to the barracks. Because of ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁸ the wounded, we left the convent very soon after going in because the wounded and the children and everybody else were traumatised by the bombing. Nobody went into the church. The church was a bit further off, 50 metres away from the convent, and nobody went in there.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, how did this expert acquire his expertise?

MR. NICE: He's been looking at buildings around the world for many years. Largely independent, I think, and dedicated to the process of analysing, and I don't think his expertise has been doubted. I can't remember now whether he has -- what his initial degree was, his initial qualifications, but he's been looking at buildings on this basis and on all sides. We'll dig out his CV for you.

Can we look at the photographs which he produced, which are part of Exhibit 88 --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, with regard to your question, I wish to make another objection. We heard Mr. Nice saying that Mr. Riedlmayer bases his comments and assertions on witness statements. He is not competent to take witness statements. He is not a judge. He is in no way qualified to take witness statements, and these stories only prove that all of this is a fake.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, he would be qualified to -- to receive a report from anybody. I mean, there's nothing unusual about that. I don't know whether one would have to characterise it as a witness statement.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, can we just --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, proceed. ⁴⁶⁶⁰⁹

MR. NICE: Just to remind you of Exhibit 88, we'll have a look at the photographs, please. If they can go on the overhead projector. They've been flagged.

Q. It's a part of his report, a very careful report, and I'm dealing with -- let me just explain to you, Mr. Odak. Yesterday you were emphatic about how the market was destroyed and how the mosque was destroyed, and I showed you a picture of the mosque yesterday as part of the destroyed buildings that one could see. You didn't actually identify it, but nevertheless you gave that evidence.

Now, let's have a look at this photograph, please, which is the first one. It's probably going to help if you just start at K029370. I think that's flagged in the same place. 370.

This is the Djakovica bazaar, and if we look at his analysis, he told us this: "Nearly all the shops in the historic market are burnt out, in a wide area covering several city blocks surrounding the Hadum Mosque. "The destruction covers the entirety of the historic bazaar area designated for protection, with the exception of a row of shops along the even-numbered side of Abedin Torbesh Street ... Building interiors burnt out to the roof lines.

"Roofs collapsed, dividing walls between shops mostly intact, in many cases with the original roof tiles still lined up along the tops of the walls undisturbed. No signs of the blast damage that would have been expected if the bazaar had really been hit by airstrikes. "Yugoslav authorities have claimed that the damage to the bazaar and the Hadum Mosque were caused by NATO airstrikes. ⁴⁶⁶¹⁰ "Rubble was cleared during the summer from most burned-out interiors, but ... there had been no reconstruction ..." And he then says this: There's a photograph of the Djakovica bazaar being burned, which was taken secretly by a local resident, Petrit Domi, on January 4 1999, and he says has additional photographs of bodies of murdered people lying in front of burning shops. So he's giving an account here of the burning out of that bazaar going back to January 1999.

JUDGE KWON: 4th of January?

MR. NICE: 4th of January, yes.

JUDGE KWON: Or 1st of April?

MR. NICE: Oh, 1st of April, it may be, actually. I think it's the 1st of April in the American dating system.

Q. Is there anything he records factually about roof collapses, tiles on the top, and anything else that goes to show this was a burning that you can challenge?

A. Mr. Nice, that's what I said a moment ago. We keep going back to the same topic and keep saying the same things. I'm not claiming that there were no individual crimes. I state that again. But most of the burning was the result of the NATO aggression. Let me mention again that all these buildings and all the houses are next to each other. It's a row of houses, one next to each other. So that when one house is burnt, this causes a large fire spreading in a whole quarter of Djakovica. And the place most targeted by NATO was the Cabrat feature and that part of the settlement bordering on that hill. ⁴⁶⁶¹¹

Q. Next page, please, Mr. Prendergast. One more detail on this and then I'll turn to the mosque and then I must be done for reasons of time. But this is what this expert has recorded about bombing.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Generally, do fires result from bombing?

MR. NICE: I can't answer that question.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Are you in a position to help me with that, Lieutenant Colonel?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't understand your question. I apologise.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Do fires result from bombing?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, absolutely.

MR. NICE:

Q. Let's look at what one of his informants told Mr. Riedlmayer, because he's set it out on the following page. An informant was listening to the radio and heard a Serb evening newscast at 8 p.m. on the 24th say that the city centres of Belgrade, Novi Sad, Pristina, and Djakovica had been bombed by NATO.

The informant explained that he was amazed, since he lived in the centre of town and at that point had heard no planes or explosions in the vicinity.

He explained to Mr. Riedlmayer that the Yugoslav army base on the edge of town was later hit by an airstrike but not the town centre itself. And then he said this: "Then, after midnight, Serb police and civilians came on foot and in cars and set the Hadum Mosque and the surrounding old bazaar area on fire and started killing people." ⁴⁶⁶¹² Now, this is the account given of somebody who was triggered to -- who was caused to react because what was put out by the radio was, to his knowledge, a lie. May this informant be right and may the bazaar have been set on fire by police, civilians on foot who also killed people? May that be right?

A. Mr. Nice, let me tell you for the umpteenth time that I have no knowledge of that. What I do know about is what I told you. So I kindly ask you to ask me different questions. You keep asking me the same questions and then I give you the same answers.

Q. I have nearly finished, but you've given evidence that is to be relied on, if accepted, that there was nothing wrong happening at the hands of Serbs, police, military, or others in the town of which you were the senior military officer, and I'm giving you a chance to comment on the evidence to the contrary effect.

If Mr. Prendergast would move on a few pages to 9373, we'll see what is said about the mosque.

JUDGE ROBINSON: When did Riedlmayer collect this evidence?

MR. NICE: 26th of October is the surveyor's report of 1999, and I think we'll find that the survey was about that time, but I'm not absolutely sure.

JUDGE ROBINSON: He was acting on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor?

MR. NICE: No.

JUDGE ROBINSON: No?

MR. NICE: I think not. I'll find out. I think he was originally ⁴⁶⁶¹³ instructed by others. He was an independent consultant to UNMIK in 2001 and he came our way via that route. I've got a part of his CV up and I'll remind myself a bit more of the detail before I sit down.

Q. But if we could just look at this picture here of the mosque, which is a large wooden extended portico in front of the mosque - that's this picture - burnt down completely, and he says this, Mr. Odak: The lead on the roof of the burnt down portico and on the three small domes covering the arcade of the mosque melted in the fire. The massive wooden door of the mosque was badly charred, with soot marks coming from a semi-circular window above the entrance door. Damage to the 18th century mural paintings and interiors of the dome. The minaret was decapitated. The top portion above the balcony was shot away. Much of the rubble of the fallen minaret appears to have crushed on top of the adjacent library building, leading to the collapse of its rear wall.

So that's his description. And if the Court turns to the next page, we get, I think, a better clue as to the dating. Again if you look at the photograph at the top, please, Mr. Prendergast, we see it's photo by Riedlmayer, October 1999, fire scarred base of the minaret with rubble. And then he then gives this account from an informant. On the first night of NATO bombing, March the 24th, Serb radio announced the NATO bombing of Belgrade, Novi Sad, Pristina, and Djakovica. It's the same again for the informant. He was amazed. But then it goes on to say an incendiary device was thrown at the door of the mosque, but only the wooden extension of the portico and the exterior of the door and ⁴⁶⁶¹⁴ other woodwork was burned. The interior of the mosque did not catch on fire, even though an incendiary projectile was fired through the opening above doorway. The reason is - and this is the reason for the blockage above the doorway - that a few months earlier, elderly members of the congregation had complained of cold drafts coming into the mosque through the opening and the thick wooden board had been mounted inside to keep the cold air out. That board caught on fire and burned, and he says you can see the soot marks above the door, but it kept the incendiary missile from burning the interior of the mosque.

The library and the Quran school next door were burnt at the time. And the mosque minaret was decapitated, according to the informant, later in May of 1999.

Now, that's the detailed account obtained in October 1999 by an expert working, I think then for UNMIK, but we'll get the detail of that. Do you have any comment you'd like to make about the detail he gives?

A. Mr. Nice, that night I was in the barracks, the barracks which were destroyed completely. It was hit first. And then there was a rain of bombs, a whole torrent of bombs targeting Cabrat. I pulled out the resources, and in the upper part of the houses at Cabrat was already on fire and the fire spread towards the lower part of town. I passed by that way and saw a large number of fire engines trying to put out the fire. That's what I saw. And I consider and claim that that was the result of the NATO bombing.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Odak, do you recollect when the bombing started? ⁴⁶⁶¹⁵

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the bombing started somewhere towards evening. I can't remember exactly. I think it might have been between 1900 and 2000 hours.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. If you're going to blame all the fires on bombs, can you explain why it is that the VJ were complaining about army reservists firing buildings? Why was it necessary for them to go around and burn a few more? Sorry, the MUP complaining about the VJ or about the reservists.

A. Mr. Nice, I don't know who this refers to specifically, but if there were any complaints and any complaining done, then in cooperation with the commander of my unit, Colonel General Djosan, they would solve those matters. And let me repeat once again: Possibly there were individual cases of excessive behaviour, however, as far as I know, not in our brigade. And that report, the report given by Mr. Colic, or account by Mr. Colic, doesn't mention anywhere -- at least, he says that it is strictly Djakovica, as far as -- or not Djakovica, I'm sorry, that it was strictly not Djakovica, as far as I was able to gather from the record.

Q. I can't take any more time. I repeat the position, it's this: In light of your exclusion of other forces, paramilitary or police, as those to your knowledge responsible for what was happening in Djakovica, I must suggest to you quite clearly, Mr. Odak, that you are substantially responsible, through yourself, through your men, for the crimes, the grave crimes committed in Djakovica, and you, like other military commanders at your level, are going to have to come here and lie because you know that ⁴⁶⁶¹⁶ if you don't support each other you'll all be held responsible, not here but elsewhere, for what you did, and that's why you're here to lie to us. Isn't that the truth?

A. Mr. Nice, those are just your wishes. What you have just uttered is completely incorrect. We only carried out our military assignments and defended our country. What you are claiming has nothing to do with the truth.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, I've got copies of Mr. Riedlmayer's curriculum vitae, if you'd like to have it. It's, of course, available elsewhere, in the original exhibit, I think. The position seems to be that he, with a very long history of scholarship in respect of Balkan matters, Turkish and other, co-founded in 1999 the cultural -- the Kosovo Cultural Heritage Project, and that led to his, as I recall, mission to the area and his examination of the various sites that he logged, and then he became a consultant to UNMIK.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Nice. Mr. Milosevic, any re-examination?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll do my best, Mr. Robinson. Re-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] You were asked at the beginning whether you had seen a killed terrorist. You remember that? You remember being asked that question?

A. They asked me about 1999.

Q. Yes. Did you see any terrorist killed, a killed terrorist, and you didn't have a chance to reply. How is it possible that you did not ⁴⁶⁶¹⁷ see a single one? Does that mean the conclusion drawn by Mr. Nice, that the terrorists were not killed?

A. No, no. Wherever we had a clash and conflict with the terrorists, we found a lot of traces of blood. However, just like anybody else, they pulled out their wounded and dead.

Q. Very well. Now, with regard to the several hundred ID cards that you found in the village of Nec, did any Albanian complain that their ID identity cards were taken away, confiscated?

A. No.

Q. And you found the identity cards yourself, did you?

A. Yes.

Q. Your battalion was the only unit in Djakovica; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And yours was a logistics battalion. Is that true?

A. Yes.

Q. And is it true that your battalion was not a combat unit?

A. Yes.

Q. So if in a town we have a non-combat unit, is it the assumption that there is supposed to be some fighting there or combat action?

A. Certainly not.

Q. Mr. Nice said or, rather, he mentioned large guns, cannons, 20, 30 and 40 millimetres, which are so large that they can target aircraft. Now, on the ground troops and land artillery are there cannons and guns of that calibre?

A. No, there are no cannons of that calibre. They are anti-aircraft ⁴⁶⁶¹⁸ cannons.

Q. All right, fine. And are they all much bigger than 20, 30, 40 millimetres?

A. Yes. If we look at mortars, they start with 60 millimetres upwards.

Q. Right, 60 millimetres upwards. Now, tell us whether the anti-aircraft weapons calibres are in fact the smallest type of calibre for artillery weapons.

A. Yes, yes.

Q. Mr. Nice also asked you another question with regard to the commission and what the commission did, what its work was, because you provided the commission with statements. Otherwise, he showed us a document here belonging to the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia. During his cross-examination of General Geza Farkas, we were shown that document. It is a document of the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia which related to the expert team, and it was marked as tab 10 in the binder that Mr. Nice presented.

Now, may we have this placed on the overhead projector? I would like you to read what it says here. It's the document that was presented by Mr. Nice, a General Staff document. I hope we can see it even if you don't separate the pages, Mr. Usher.

What does it say there? Do you have the portion underlined at the top? "Monitoring and analysing documents." What does it say, tasks of the expert team, is that what it says?

A. Yes, tasks of the expert team. ⁴⁶⁶¹⁹

Q. So this says what the task was, and what does it say? Read it out for us, please.

A. "Monitoring and analysing documents and data from the indictments of the Prosecutor of The Hague Tribunal against professional members of the army of Yugoslavia, or VJ members, and retired officers."

Q. Thank you, Lieutenant Colonel.

JUDGE KWON: Just a second. I'd like to make it sure with Mr. Nice whether this is not a part of those parts for which provisionally protective measures was allowed.

MR. NICE: I don't think so. There were only the two passages, and --

JUDGE KWON: You showed this passage to this witness, didn't you?

MR. NICE: I think so. I don't think this was subject to protective measures. No, definitely not. Ms. Dicklich says definitely not, so that can be relied on.

JUDGE KWON: What is the tab number? Tab 10 of Exhibit 921? And the protective measures were not allowed. Yes. Thank you. Let us proceed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Lieutenant Colonel, among the tasks -- well, you read out what the tasks were. Is there mention of my name anywhere there perhaps?

A. No, Mr. Milosevic.

Q. Well, I'm just asking you to take a good look, because Mr. Nice asked many witnesses here and claimed that the expert team was in fact established to assist me. And what does it say there, please? Monitoring ⁴⁶⁶²⁰ and what? What else?

A. "Monitoring, analysing documents and data from the indictments of the Prosecutor of The Hague Tribunal against professional VJ members and retired officers."

Q. I see. Professional VJ members and retired officers. That's what it says, does it?

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you, Lieutenant Colonel. Let's move on. We can return the document now.

Now, you saw images of destroyed houses. You were shown that yesterday, bombed houses or destroyed houses in Djakovica. And if I remember correctly, Mr. Nice said that these were taken in August 1999. Can you perhaps tell me, what you think about this? How come nobody took those photographs before August 1999?

A. Well, I assume that they weren't necessary and that -- that they were perhaps taken later on and not at that particular time perhaps. That's not when they came into being.

Q. Lieutenant Colonel, you said that in Djakovica at the end of the war there were twice as many inhabitants as there were at the beginning, that is to say that Djakovica was chock-a-block full of inhabitants. Is that what you said?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, Mr. Nice asked you who perpetrated the killing and cleansing of Djakovica and expulsion of the population. So I'm asking you now, those inhabitants who were there, and there were twice as many of them at ⁴⁶⁶²¹ the end of the war, were they live? Were they live inhabitants or were they killed and cleansed?

A. Well, I said that there were so many people, such a lot of population all over Djakovica --

Q. How many? Twice as many? Double the number?

A. I assume so, yes.

Q. Or perhaps 50 per cent more?

A. Yes, let's say 50 per cent more.

Q. All right. Thank you. So that, as he said, they were cleansed and killed but their number increased during the war, during all that killing and cleansing, which is of course quite logical, is it not? Lieutenant Colonel, this alleged informant of Riedlmayer's said that on the first day it was just the barracks that were bombed and that that was at the outskirts of town, as he said. Now, on that first day of the war - you were there - was it only the barracks that were bombed or was anything else bombed?

A. I've already said that on the first day of the bombing the barracks were bombed and another facility, the Cabrat facility and feature, which was where the firing positions of the artillery battalion were located. And that is on the outskirts of Djakovica towards Cabrat. That's where there's a settlement.

Q. All right. Now, did a bomb drop on the settlement or did all the bombs fall on Cabrat?

A. Well, I assume they fell on the settlement as well because part of the settlement is on the slopes of Cabrat hill, in fact. ⁴⁶⁶²²

Q. So when you say Cabrat was bombed, you mean their intention to target a military facility and not the fact of where the bombs fell?

A. Yes.

Q. But where did the bombs fall on the first day of the war?

A. I've already said that the barracks were hit two or three times, and then afterwards, the bombs fell on places where the artillery battalion used to be before. As they moved positions, their positions on the hill frequently, they would be closer to the houses or further away from the houses so that the bombs were falling on all sides. And I said that Cabrat was bombed massively that night. And of course a part of the settlement was hit as well, the part of the settlement that is located on the slopes of Cabrat hill.

Q. On that first day, Djakovica was bombed, that first day of the war, that first evening of the war; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, to the best of your recollections, and I'm not asking you to give us precise data because you said you couldn't pinpoint it, General Djosan spoke about that, but how frequently was Djakovica bombed throughout the war?

A. Every day.

Q. So Djakovica was bombed daily?

A. Yes, daily.

Q. Now I'm going to ask you the same thing that Mr. Nice asked you: Do you allow for the possibility that in that daily bombing of Djakovica, from the first to the last day, those bombs did not destroy houses, did ⁴⁶⁶²³ not cause fires, and did not inflict destruction? Do you allow for that possibility?

A. I do not allow for it, no.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And, gentlemen, I say that General Djosan gave us the precise facts and figures about the bombing of Djakovica, the intensive bombing of Djakovica throughout the course of the war.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Odak, what's the distance between the Djakovica barracks and the marketplace? How far were the barracks located from the marketplace?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As the crow flies, in a straight line, or if you take the road, sir?

JUDGE KWON: Whatever. As the crow flies, how far would it be?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think somewhere about one kilometre.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And at what distance is the Cabrat settlement that was hit?

A. Well, the settlement starts on the slopes of Mount Cabrat, or Cabrat hill, and ends about 50 metres away from the bazaar.

Q. So that settlement that was hit on that first day is some 50 metres away from the bazaar; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you, Lieutenant Colonel.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Sorry. Mr. Nice, do you concede that Djakovica ⁴⁶⁶²⁴ was bombed at some time?

MR. NICE: I don't think there's any doubt that its military targets may have been bombed. We don't necessarily have the precise dates. It's clear from Djosan, I think, that even on his allegation, it wasn't every day or anything like it. You may remember we went through his diary to see the number of days when he said there was no bombing. I don't think it's challenged that there was some bombing, but I'll see if I can find out more detail. It's not actually that easy to find historic record of the precise days of bombing for such things. Evidence would seem to suggest some days but not every day.

JUDGE KWON: I wonder whether the witness is able to position the location of barracks or marketplaces or bazaars in this map. This is Prosecution Exhibit 83. Could we put it on the ELMO, page 24. It's a city map of Djakovica.

Can we see those places in this map? Where is the marketplace, first of all? Do you recognise the map? Could we zoom out a bit. Zoom out. A bit further.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Roughly speaking, that would be the barracks, although this map is not quite clear to me, but roughly speaking, this is where the barracks should be.

JUDGE KWON: And the bazaar?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If this is Hadum Mosque, then this is the Cabrat feature. So it's this part of the settlement. And the bazaar is -- should be here somewhere. I can't pinpoint it. I can't get my bearings on this map, but thereabouts. ⁴⁶⁶²⁵

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. NICE: I'll see if we can lay hold of a better map. If not from the existing exhibits, it may be possible to get one from another source, but the maps are curiously difficult to find.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Colonel, please. To your right there is a map of Kosovo with the localities where there was activity. Could you show the area of Djakovica on that map very precisely, please.

A. [Indicates]

Q. So that's the area of Djakovica. We see that there were many attacks there, lots of bombings. How many attacks were there on Djakovica?

A. 236.

Q. That's what it says in the table, on the left-hand side?

A. Yes.

Q. Djakovica, 236 attacks. So in attacks, a large number of projectiles are always used. So that number could be multiplied by a certain number of projectiles; is that right?

A. This is probably just the total number of attacks.

Q. Yes, yes. These are just the locations where there were attacks. It's the number of attacks. What does it say there? Does it say number of attacks or what?

A. Number of attacks.

Q. All right. Number of attacks. And how many were there near -- around Djakovica? ⁴⁶⁶²⁶

A. 236, but --

Q. 236 during the 78 days of the war?

A. Yes.

Q. You described that first day, that first day. Since you went there, you pulled people out, you pulled things out, and so on and so forth, and you saw the fire-fighting units trying to extinguish the fire that was a consequence of the bombing; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. So what does this look like to you now, what Mr. Nice is asserting? He claims that our police engaged in arson and that then our fire-fighting units, which also belonged to the police, as you know, were trying to put out the fire. So that would mean that certain policemen were setting the place on fire and others were trying to extinguish the fire. What does that sound like to you? Does that saw plausible to you?

A. That is implausible and it is malicious. It is a well-known thing that fire-fighting units belong to the Ministry of the Interior.

Q. All right. Could you please explain this now, what Riedlmayer wrote in relation to this church and monastery, because you explained that you put the wounded there. To the best of your knowledge, since you are a trained officer of the army of Yugoslavia, the protection of the wounded, is that one of the key preoccupations of international humanitarian law?

A. Yes, certainly, by all means.

Q. All right. Let's leave that aside now. So protection of the wounded is one of the main preoccupations of international humanitarian law. And protecting the sick and frail and wounded is also one of the key ⁴⁶⁶²⁷ principles of the Christian faith.

A. Yes.

Q. So let me put a question: What is so strange about putting up wounded in a church or a monastery? Is this a violation of international humanitarian law or anything?

A. I don't think it's any kind of violation. First of all, we did not put up the wounded there without the consent of the local priest, not to mention how important this building was for us as a temporary hospital or infirmary until we found a better location, because there were some people who were very seriously wounded.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, how much longer will you be? I'm trying so see whether we'll be finished before taking the break. If not, then we'll take the break now and return.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I really have to have a look at my notes, to tell you the truth. Perhaps I don't really need very much time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We're going to take the break. We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.36 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: There is a better map of Djakovica already in evidence. It's 143, tab 1. I've got hard copies -- I've got paper copies for you. In paper copy form it's not particularly satisfactory, although it's probably better than the one from the atlas. It's available on Sanction and on Sanction it retains its original clarity of marking and ⁴⁶⁶²⁸ Ms. Dicklich may be able to zoom in on parts of it if anybody wants to ask more detailed questions.

It was a map that was produced by the witness Niki Peraj. I think his handwritten notations, numbers 1, 2, 3 may be forward command posts, but Mr. Coo, who was good enough to locate this map and have it reproduced, is checking the transcripts in case it's material, to see what the code 1, 2 and 3 means and to remind us of that. But Ms. Dicklich will enlarge parts of this, if anybody wants her to, on Sanction and thus on the screen.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Lieutenant Colonel, when using the monastery, did you do it any damage?

A. Absolutely not. I've already said one of the reasons why we left the monastery even quicker was -- well, as I've already said to you, the barracks is right next door. There is just a wall in between. So there was a lot of external damage coming from the debris from the barracks after the bombing. So the external part facing the barracks was damaged. So that is absolutely untrue that we damaged something, let alone destroyed something.

Q. All right. Was any form of violence displayed? I mean I'm not referring even to beatings or whatever. Mr. Nice or Mr. Riedlmayer mentioned the nuns or persons who lived in the monastery.

A. I've already said, Mr. Milosevic, that all the nuns went to ⁴⁶⁶²⁹ monastery that was right next to the church, and I already said that the church was apart. So we didn't have any contact with the nuns. We were staying at the newer monastery. They took all the things they could take out of the monastery and they handed it over the building to us, empty, and we used the building as such and emptied it later. And we even checked it with the nuns to see whether everything was all right, and they had no objections to us or our behaviour.

Q. All right. Riedlmayer is claiming the opposite. And you were there and --

A. And I carried this through. And I was in contact with the priest all the time to see whether there were any problems, and he never complained about anything.

Q. All right. Your task as commander of the logistics battalion was to take care of the wounded, to provide medical care, et cetera.

A. Yes, yes. That's a medical platoon, and we actually set up a hospital there.

Q. All right. Just a few very specific questions. Mr. Nice referred to the paramilitaries in Djakovica. Did you see any formation or, rather, I don't want to say formation. Did you see any paramilitary group in Djakovica?

A. Absolutely not. There weren't any paramilitary formations there at all.

Q. Was a para-police formation there of any kind?

A. No, no, certainly not. At least, not that I know of, but then, I was there and I did not see them. And since I was there and I did not see ⁴⁶⁶³⁰ them, it's certain they were not there.

Q. And he also mentioned another category; reservists. What does that mean, reservists? Were they integrated into the military units or was there a special group of reservists?

A. No. Reservists are persons who had been mobilised and they became part of the established units. Now, let me explain this. A company can have about 120 men in peacetime and about 150 during wartime, and they would, for example, be added to a company.

Q. All right. When they would be added to a company, did they differ from other soldiers in any way?

A. No, they didn't. They wouldn't.

Q. Thank you, Lieutenant Colonel. I have no further questions.

MR. KAY: Perhaps I could deal with the issue of the map that's been produced as Exhibit 143, tab 1, and ask the witness to mark on one of the copies Mr. Nice has produced the various locations, if that would be helpful to the Trial Chamber.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. KAY: Thank you. Perhaps a copy of Exhibit 143, tab 1, could be given to the witness.

Questioned by Mr. Kay:

Q. Lieutenant Colonel Odak, just take a little while to familiarise yourself with this additional map of Djakovica. Are you able to mark on here, first of all, where your barracks were?

A. It's this part, if you can see it.

Q. Would you put a big A there in a circle. ⁴⁶⁶³¹

A. [Marks].

Q. We know that means barracks. Could you point out now where the bazaar was.

A. [Indicates].

Q. Put a big circle with a B there.

A. [Marks].

Q. And Cabrat hill. The general location of that. If you could do a line down the map, perhaps, that might be a better way of showing it.

A. No, it's impossible. This is the length of it. This is where the hill of Cabrat is. I can mark, say, the boundary between Cabrat and town.

Q. Perfect. If you'd do that. Do a line along the map, showing the outer reaches of Cabrat. And you told us that that was 50 metres from the bazaar.

A. [Marks]. No. No. What I said was that the outskirts of that neighbourhood that gravitates towards Cabrat is about 50 metres away. The outskirts of the neighbourhood that already belongs to town. It's this area here, this street here. I don't know exactly what the name of the street is, but we called it the Catholic street. It was right here.

Q. Now, on the left of your line you've done there, if you could just shade it in so that we can see it better when we come back to this. So if you could just some hatching to the left the line. No, on the other side. That's it.

A. [Marks].

Q. And we can see that. Thank you. And then the mosque. Are you able to identify where that would be ⁴⁶⁶³² on the map, and put a circle with a D.

A. I think it is around here.

Q. I think they've given you a pen there which has sort of run out of felt tip, but I've got a better one here. Thank you.

A. [Marks].

Q. That's better. Yes. Perhaps go around the A and B again so that we can pick that up.

A. [Marks].

Q. Yes, that's better. Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: Mosque being the Bada [sic] Mosque.

MR. KAY: The Hadum Mosque.

JUDGE KWON: Hadum. So St. Anthony church is around A?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it's been marked. There is a wall here. Yes. Yes. Somebody drew the area where the barracks were exactly. This is the area where the monastery was, and the church is this here, and that's where the old monastery was. And this is the new monastery. This is the one that was right next door to the barracks. We were here. We did not go up there at all.

JUDGE KWON: Could you put an E on the St. Anthony church -- the monastery.

A. [Marks].

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, no. You didn't hear the question. The monastery.

JUDGE KWON: I'm confused.

MR. KAY: ⁴⁶⁶³³

Q. Can you mark -- does the E represent the church or the monastery?

A. E is the monastery. And we will -- C.

Q. Is the church.

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. KAY: Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me just deal with Lieutenant General Odak's statements which were marked for identification during General Djosan's evidence. That's from D321.

Tab 8 was not used and therefore will not be admitted. Tab 11, not translated and will remain marked for identification pending translation.

Tab 30, divided into a longer portion which we will admit. The shorter one is not translated and will remain marked for identification pending translation.

And then this map, in which the witness has marked certain places and buildings, will be admitted.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be D328 for the marked map.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think it would be useful if the witness would mark Cabrat with a pencil. If he would shade the area where he said the slopes of Cabrat were so that we would have a complete --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. ⁴⁶⁶³⁴

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those would be the boundaries. Is that all right?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, you'd know whether it's all right. I just wanted --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I meant was it enough?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's visible, we can see it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, for what it's worth, the Sanction enlargement, the last section of the map of which the witness was concentrating in answer to questions from Mr. Kay would appear to show a church sign, either in the position of E or C, but if you want to convert to Sanction you can see the details. It's available on the original map. If that's of any interest to you. That would appear to show the same area, with a church just opposite from what the witness said is the barracks, but there it is. We haven't been able to find, at the moment, on the enlargements of the central part of town, references to the church or to the -- I beg your pardon, to the mosque or to the bazaar, but that may be lack of familiarity with the legend.

While I'm on my feet, can I just make one short point in answer to an earlier question of the Court. Mr. Fischman has looked up the position of Mr. Riedlmayer, and our collective memory was roughly right, I think. He checked with UNESCO whether there was going to be any survey done of cultural damage in Kosovo. Finding that there wasn't, he put out an internet search for assistance and funding, was joined by an architect whose name indeed we've seen, and then got funding following an approach ⁴⁶⁶³⁵ to Harvard Centre for Middle Eastern Studies and Packard Humanities Institute. So his work was independent and independently funded.

JUDGE KWON: It's in the transcript.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Lieutenant Colonel, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for attending at the Tribunal to give it, and you may now leave.

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Your next witness, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I cannot call the next witness. I don't feel well, and I can't go on sitting here, and I want to say that I am opposed to any kind of hearing in my absence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the nature of your illness?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that this doctor who sent you a report has very good information about what it is, and you have got these reports. Everybody here knows, by the way, that I've been coming here for weeks now with great difficulty, but that is my own affair.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Milosevic, is to let the Court know how you are feeling. We do have a medical report.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, right now, Mr. Robinson, this is the way I feel: I have this enormous pressure in my eyes, ears. I feel as if my head weighed half a tonne. I am bothered by any kind of sound. Well, not any kind of sound, but any more intensive sound. I have a headache which is not that bad, but this pressure in my head is unbearable, and in my ears too. ⁴⁶⁶³⁶

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you for the information.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, arrangements are being made to have you medically examined at the Tribunal, and while those arrangements are being made, we'll adjourn.

--- Recess taken at 11.21 a.m.

--- On resuming at 12.29 p.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: The Chamber has had the benefit of a report from the Tribunal doctor, Dr. Gerts, and as a result of that, the Chamber considers it inappropriate to continue sitting today, and we will not sit tomorrow. In the circumstances, then, we'll adjourn until Monday of next week.

We are adjourned.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.31 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 21st day

of November, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.