⁴¹⁸⁸

Friday, 3 May 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Call Dr. Rugova, please.

JUDGE MAY: His summary?

MR. NICE: Yes, indeed, for distribution now. The witness will certainly have a copy somewhere with him. Perhaps the Court will at some stage explain to him what the limitations are as to whether he may refer to it.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. How long is he here for?

MR. NICE: It will obviously be preferable to conclude his evidence today, but it is possible for him to stay over the weekend.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We have to rise at 4.00 or 4.15 this afternoon because there's an Initial Appearance after this.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Would you take the declaration, please.

WITNESS: IBRAHIM RUGOVA

[Witness answered through interpreter]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to take a seat. Examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. Is your full name Ibrahim Uke Rugova? ⁴¹⁸⁹

A. Yes.

Q. It's Dr. Rugova, is it not?

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Dr. Rugova, you are, of course, a Kosovar Albanian; you were born in the village of Cerrce, in the municipality of Istok, in 1944; you had elementary education in Istok and in Peje; you went to Pristina University, where you qualified in literature, and specialising and earning a doctorate in due course in the history of literary criticism and Albanian literature?

A. Yes.

Q. In 1988, you became president of the Kosovo Writers' Association, and in December of 1999, you were founder of a group, the Council for the Defence of Human Rights and Freedoms. Was that group one of Kosovo's first human rights groups?

A. Yes, it was.

Q. In 1989, was a party, political party, the Democratic League of Kosovo, known as the LDK, formed? What part did you play in its formation and what office did you take?

A. I was one of the founders of this party, which we founded on December 23, 1989. At its first meeting, I was elected chairman of the Democratic League of Kosova; that is, I had the role of the chairman of this party, which was the first democratic party set up in Kosova on the eastern part of that then world, I would say.

Q. You were elected president then. Have you remained president of the party since? ⁴¹⁹⁰

A. Yes. I continue to be the chairman of this party. The last year I was elected -- 1998, re-elected chairman, in February, and recently we are going to hold a fourth congress of this party.

Q. I leave a gap from time to time, Dr. Rugova, between questions and answers to accommodate the interpreters, as you will understand. We are going to hear in due course about elections that occurred in the 1990s, as a result of which you were elected to certain offices, but the most recent position is that you have been elected as President of Kosovo, and that is an office you've held since March of this year; is that correct?

A. Yes. I was elected President by the parliament of Kosova in March this year, parliament which was formed after the last elections held on September -- on November 17 last year.

Q. Thank you. Let's now go back to the relevant history starting, at any event, in 1989. In that year, did the Yugoslav government impose special measures in Kosovo as a result of what was described as political unrest?

A. Yes. These violent measures were imposed as early as 1981, when the first student demonstrations took place.

Q. Picking the story up in 1989, if we can, tell us --

A. In 1989, violent measures, special measures or extraordinary measures they were called at that time. There were protests because Kosova was deprived of its status, that is in March 1989. This was done by the Serbian Assembly on the 28th of March, and this situation continued. ⁴¹⁹¹

Q. Yes. Had there been an election held on the 23rd of March of 1989 the in the Kosovo parliament? Can you just tell us a little bit about that but only a sentence or so?

A. Yes. The Assembly of Kosova had to discuss the suspension of the federal status of Kosova, that is, autonomous status of Kosova. And a great pressure was brought to bear on the deputies of the parliament to vote in favour of these measures, but the public was against, that is, the citizens, the people at large. Pressure, violence was used. I remember that there were tanks surrounding the parliament building. In the parliament building, there were police, secret police dressed in civilian clothes. And therefore, the members had to vote under pressure. Some members voted --

Q. Thank you. How many voted against and what happened to them?

A. I remember ten members voting against it. Then these members were sentenced, punished somewhere, sent to prison somewhere, dismissed from jobs. So they feared implications because of that.

Q. And in the demonstrations that you've already referred to in this time, 1989, were there any casualties amongst the demonstrators?

A. Yes. Some were injured, and about 20 were killed. These demonstrations were staged in several cities of Kosova.

Q. Yes. What rule was there in Kosovo in 1988 and 1989 so far as you were concerned?

A. After the revocation of the autonomy of Kosova, the Serb rule was established and several institutions were suspended and control, police control, was established over Kosova. The Ministry of Interior of Kosova ⁴¹⁹² and Kosova police didn't have any rights thereafter. Therefore, they were placed under the direct orders of Belgrade, and Serb police were stationed in Kosova.

Q. Was there any increase in the number of Serb police operating in Kosovo? If so, where did those policemen come from?

A. As of 1989, as I said, Serb police came to Kosova, and at that time there were still policemen from other former republics like Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, Vojvodina, Macedonia.

Q. And what happened to the other police and particularly the Albanian police?

A. The Albanian police of Kosova began to be dismissed from their jobs. This came to an end in 1990. In 1991, all of them were dismissed.

Q. Let us now turn to a little of the history and the philosophy of your party, the LDK. The initial aims of that party were what, Dr. Rugova?

A. The first objective of this party was to establish democracy in Kosova, to start a democratic life for all its citizens. Second, it aimed to have Kosova a republic equal to the other republics in the former Federation, because as I said, Kosova was stripped of its autonomy, and this was our main goal. Then we were striving to build an independent Kosova for rights -- with rights for all its citizens. This was the main and initial goal, but the main thing was to defend the Kosova people who were jeopardised then.

The philosophy of our party is very comprehensive. It includes economic, cultural, and general development of Kosova. ⁴¹⁹³

MR. NICE: Paragraph 8 of the summary for the Court.

Q. In July of 1990, was there a declaration made in the Kosovo parliament, and if so, can you explain that to us and explain how to fitted into the laws and structures of Kosovo at that time?

A. On July 2nd, a statement was prepared and endorsed by the members of the Kosova Assembly. The members were not allowed to enter the chamber. They were banned from entering it. But they held the meeting outside, in the vicinity of the assembly building, and they endorsed a statement, which we refer to as the Constitutional Statement, or the Statement for Independence, which is asking for Kosova to become an independent republic equal to the other former republics of the former Federation. Likewise, it said that we did not recognise the amendments approved by the Serb Assembly on 28th of March and that we will refer to Kosova as "Kosova." This was a crucial document which was approved that day. After that, all the measures followed.

Q. Then other measures. First of all, were steps taken by the Serbian authorities in relation to your parliament?

A. We were at that time at the initial phase of building our party. Of course, reprisals were undertaken against its activists. Three days after, that is, on the 5th of July, the television and the radio of Prishtina, in Kosova, were closed, violently closed. We have film footage to show that. The only Albanian-language newspaper, Rilindja, was also suspended. So there were no more programmes in the Albanian language. Then more fierce measures ensued against other institutions of Kosova.

Q. Later in that year, was there a meeting in Kacanik? ⁴¹⁹⁴

A. Yes. A meeting was held in Kacanik, a meeting of deputies of the Kosova Assembly, who approved the Declaration of Independence, and they approved the Constitution of the Republic of Kosova at that assembly in Kacanik. It was a very important document for Kosova's future development, and also a very democratic document.

Q. Moving on one year, to 1991, again to September, in that month of 1991, was there a referendum? Can you tell us how that was organised and what was its result?

A. In September 1991, Kosova held its own referendum on independence, and this referendum was very well organised and supervised. And the question was: Are you in favour of the independence of Kosova or not? And 98 or 99 per cent of the voters were in favour. So the results of the referendum were positive. And as you know, a lot of referendums were held for independence in other former Yugoslav republics, so Kosova held its own referendum and it was well organised. Of course, there was a lot of repression against many activists, but the referendum was nevertheless held.

Q. Before we move on to the attitude of the LDK following this referendum, just back to a detail of what was happening in 1989. Were Albanians losing their jobs as a result of the difficulties between Kosovo and Serbia?

A. Yes. That started in 1989 and later intensified in 1990 and continued until the majority were expelled from their jobs in 1993. It kept on continuing. In this period, about 150.000 Albanian workers were expelled from their jobs, and at that time there were about 240.000 people ⁴¹⁹⁵ employed in Kosova as a whole. So 150.000 were expelled and about 70.000 or 80.000 remained in their jobs, and these were mainly Serbs of Kosova and other nationalities. They were expelled from the economy, public services, the administration, and so forth. Some Albanians in the electricity industry and electrical installations near Prishtina and Obiliq, they were kept, but otherwise not many.

Q. From the moment of the referendum, but probably before, was the LDK's party then clearly in favour of and seeking independence?

A. After the referendum, yes. And it was the LDK's main option and the choice of the other political parties in Kosova, because various other smaller parties were founded at this time because of the result of the referendum. And as you know, the other republics had declared their independence, and the former Yugoslavia, the former Federation, had de facto begun to collapse. And we were thinking of our own fate, our own destiny in Kosova.

Q. How did the LDK approach the possibility, manifest elsewhere, of independence only coming with violence and by war? How did it approach that problem?

A. Our position was that independence should be achieved by peaceful, diplomatic, and democratic methods and violence should not be used, because it was a right of the people of Kosova, and we worked in this direction.

Q. With that in mind, can you tell us about a document that was prepared on October 11th of 1991?

A. Yes. This is a document called the "Statement with Three ⁴¹⁹⁶ Options," and it was prepared by the LDK and the other Kosova political parties, by the Albanian parties in Macedonia and southern Serbia and Montenegro, and it's a document that puts forth three options: If the internal borders of the former Yugoslavia are changed, there should be a republic of Albanians, i.e., a Republic of Kosova. The second option was the independence of the Republic of Kosova. And the third option, if the external borders of the former Yugoslavia were changed and if other countries sought to change the borders of the former Federation, then the Albanians of Kosova and other areas in the former Federation had the right to unite, to have their own state in the Balkans. So it was more a matter of a vision and a preparation for what might happen at that time, when the former Federation began to collapse.

Q. And of these three options, your party was most interested in which one?

A. We were more interested in the independence of Kosova, i.e., Kosova as an independent country, a country with good neighbourly relations with its adjacent countries.

Q. Before we pass from this document, or this agreement, what was its approach -- whatever option might be achieved, what was its approach to minority groups that would find themselves living in states of other majority ethnic composition?

A. In any event, it had a positive attitude to secure and protect and integrate these rights. This was also in the Kacanik constitution. So they would be equal citizens in the Republic of Kosova or in the territories where the Albanians are a majority. ⁴¹⁹⁷

MR. NICE: Paragraph 12 of the summary for the Court.

Q. In the 1990s, starting in 1990, apart from people losing their jobs, tell us about Albanian radio and television stations. What happened so far as they were concerned?

A. Yes. On 5th of July, 1990, the Kosova television and radio and the Rilindja newspaper were closed by police violence. No doubt there were also military forces. But journalists were thrown out of their offices by force, and there is film of this. I haven't brought it with me, but these offices were closed down and Albanian language radio and television was shut completely.

Q. What was the ability of those in Kosovo to receive radio broadcasts from Albania itself?

A. There was no longer any Albanian radio in Kosova, and radio Tirana or other Albanian-language channels were jammed with the help of certain military electronic equipment. I saw this myself. There were some vehicles with apparatus that jammed the waves, and this went on all the time.

Q. Your party, was it organised just in the major towns of Kosovo or was it organised on a wider basis?

A. It had a very widespread organisation throughout Kosova, in all the villages of Kosova and all the neighbourhoods and quarters of the cities. It was not only a party, it was also a movement. It was more than a political party, with a very good organisation and a strong civic will in which the citizens worked and organised themselves and kept life going. It was a very fine, compact organisation. ⁴¹⁹⁸

Q. Can you give us some examples of the practical things it did but also tell us what was its political focus, if you can?

A. I talked a little bit about its political focus and the democratisation of Kosova, democracy, the independence of Kosova. And in practice this party started solidarity actions to help people who were left without jobs, people who were dismissed from their jobs, and also organising society at large, keeping education and health and other fields of life going, culture, even sport. And at that time, we also started collecting a tax, not a compulsory tax but what we called a solidarity tax, mainly concentrating on helping people with food, clothing and things that they needed, because you can imagine that people who had worked for years were now on the streets and could not make ends meet. So these were the first concrete steps we took.

Q. No, education, how important? Was it just a question of practical steps or were there also political actions that you took in relation to education?

A. It was also more practical, because at that time, that is after 1990, especially 1991, all the schools started to be closed, the elementary schools, the high schools, and the university. So we tried to enable people to continue their education on public premises, but it was very difficult.

I remember in 1991, several times school pupils and students went to the public premises of the schools, but they were not allowed to enter because these premises were guarded by police. And in order to avert conflict and for the sake of the children, we stopped going to these ⁴¹⁹⁹ public buildings, and we created a system whereby school pupils could study in private houses and various other private buildings from elementary school to high school and to college level, and this continued until 1999.

So we were forced to create a system which the world at large later called the parallel system in order not to leave our children without education. Because you can imagine --

Q. I think --

A. -- entire generations being left without education.

Q. Let's now go back to paragraph 11 of the summary to how this parallel institution took some formal shape. In October of 1991, was a government formed that operated both inside and outside Kosovo?

A. Yes. In that month there was a government, what we might call a coalition government, including the LDK Prime Minister, and there were various other Ministers from other parties and also civil associations. The government mainly operated abroad because it was very difficult to operate in Kosova, but there were various kinds of councils that operated in Kosova, the finance council, the educational council, the cultural council, the council for sport and others, and they organised the life of society and of the citizens.

Q. Insofar as it operated abroad, in which countries was it based principally?

A. The government mainly worked in Germany and sometimes in Switzerland, and we had an extensive LDK organisation abroad in many European countries, in America, Canada, and Australia, because the ⁴²⁰⁰ Kosovars had the will to keep their ties with Kosova alive through this party, and they assisted with the solidarity tax of 3 per cent of their earnings.

So it was a very widespread party. And this was the first time that the Kosovars abroad, too, had their own party and their own organisation.

Q. In 1992, was there an election - I think it was 1992 - to the post of President of what was described as the Republic of Kosovo, the Kosovo Republic? Tell us about that, please.

A. These elections were held on 24th of May, 1992, and we -- the political groups in Kosova decided to hold elections and held a democratic procedure and elected a parliament and a president of Kosova. And the LDK won a majority, and I was elected President of the Republic of Kosova by an absolute majority of votes.

Of course there was also repression following these elections, but the entire people was behind them. They were held. After the elections, two activists near the city of Peje were killed. But the important thing was that these elections were held to establish a democratic order in Kosova, and they yielded their results.

Q. Your election in 1992, was that followed six years later, in March of 1998, by a further election to the same position?

A. That's right. On 22nd of March, 1998, even though the situation was very serious in Kosova and military attacks on Kosova had already begun and a kind of confrontation, we decided to hold elections because it was time. And also many political parties took part in these elections. ⁴²⁰¹ And the LDK won a majority, and then there was the Christian democratic party, and other parties won votes. And once again, I was elected President of the Republic of Kosova by an absolute majority.

Q. Thank you. Dr. Rugova, I'm going to try with some of the following topics to deal with them fairly briefly, possibly by answers that are yes or no, and then we'll come back to matters where I'll ask you for more extended answers. But - paragraph 15 - did the LDK get involved in bringing television by satellite from Albania, and did it also establish an information centre of Kosovo? Just yes or no to those, really.

A. Yes. The LDK and the government.

Q. Were people's satellite dishes ever made to suffer as a result of what you had done to provide information?

A. Yes.

Q. What happened to those dishes?

A. Unfortunately, there were. We had to provide some information in the Albanian language, and often the police had threatened people to get rid of these dishes, has punished some of them, but people still continued to have those dishes despite the police preventive measures. There are so many dishes even today in Kosova.

Q. I think foreign organisations, many of them NGOs, started to work in Kosovo, and amongst the bodies that found themselves working there were the International Red Cross, Medicin sans Frontiere, and other such organisations.

A. Yes. In 1992 -- ⁴²⁰²

Q. Again, we can probably deal with this just briefly. The LDK established relations with governments abroad, primarily perhaps with the Americans, but also having good relations with other European countries, including Germany, France, and the United Kingdom?

A. Yes.

Q. So far as you're concerned, what was the attitude of the United States towards what you were doing in Kosovo and to the development of democracy and democratic rights there?

A. The United States maintained a positive stand. They supported democracy, human rights, and had sympathy for our peaceful movement. That was the same with the European countries. I might say that the US Congress and the EU Parliament were the first to take a stand on violence and repression in Kosova. They maintained a positive stand and sympathised with us.

Q. I think that Washington opened an office in Pristina in 1996, and that was shortly followed by a European Union office, also in Pristina.

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you.

A. Yes. And this was for us of great importance because we wanted them to be present in Kosova and to establish links with us.

Q. The LDK, as you've told us, remained committed to peaceful action. Did you have any fears as to what might nevertheless happen as a result of the political developments that were taking place?

A. Yes. As I said, we were for peaceful solutions, for peaceful policy, but we were still intimidated, because if that went on for too ⁴²⁰³ long, the citizens might react to that, in face of the growing daily repression against them. So this is what we were afraid of, and tried to find some political solutions to that situation.

Q. You speak of daily repression. In a sentence or so, just tell us, as we pass through the 1990s, what sort of repression, and were there any casualties?

A. In 1990 there were some demonstrations staged where about 40 people got killed. Daily repression consisted of activists, citizens being maltreated, detained, stopped at checkpoints, which were very frequent in Kosova, or might be punished for some minor things. Let's say they were found carrying some letters, documents in Albanian language. They were sentenced to 30 to 60 days. Thousands of people have been suffering from that. They were sentenced on petty offences, I would say.

Q. And you yourself, what did you suffer, if anything, by way of inference and restriction? Paragraph 23.

A. Yes. I was very careful, didn't move about much, to escape such repression. I was very cautious. However, in 1990, once we had set up the Democratic League, I was told to give up politics: What are you doing, and what does this serve, and so on and so forth. Then in 1993 I was detained in a police station in Prishtina. I was held there for a couple of hours; then some other times, at other periods. But as I said, I tried to be very careful not to move about much, because I was afraid they might arrest me or even fare something worse.

Q. When you say you were told not to -- or to give up politics, who told you that? ⁴²⁰⁴

A. Someone from the State Security in 1990. He was working at the Ministry of Interior in Kosova. Then I found out that he had taken orders from someone from Belgrade working in the security service. I never found out his name.

Q. There came a time when the KLA came into being. How did the Serbian authorities approach the LDK once the KLA came into being? Did it deal with them similarly or separately, or in a different way?

A. If you allow me, I would like to add something to your previous question. When I travelled abroad, mainly on the border with Macedonia, I was often held up by the police for several hours at the border. In answer to your other question, I might say that their stand didn't change when the KLA appeared. I mean, they maintained the same stand on us despite the emergence of the KLA.

Q. And that approach to you was what? How would you summarise it?

A. They continued their repression against the LDK, its activities, whereas with regard to the KLA members, when there were confrontations, also they kept the same stand. This happened from March 1998, when the attack on Drenica was perpetrated, and that continued. That was the stand: violence and open conflict, which prevailed. So de facto, Belgrade decided to destroy Kosova through violence and war.

Q. Did you have any personal contact in the first half of the 1990s with the accused?

A. No, I didn't.

Q. Did you ever hear directly of his expression of interest or disinterest, support or otherwise, of what you were doing politically in ⁴²⁰⁵ Kosovo in that time?

A. No. There was a tendency to establish contacts, but that was refused. I remember from the London conference. In fact, we didn't have any contacts and we didn't see any interest.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, before you move to the next part, I wanted to have something clarified from Dr. Rugova. In 1990, Kosovo had declared itself an independent entity within Yugoslavia, equal to the other republics. That is a status to be distinguished from independence. What was the constitutional relationship, as you understood it then, between Kosovo as an independent entity and the Yugoslav government? What would the Yugoslav government be constitutionally entitled to do in relation to Kosovo as an independent entity?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We proclaimed Kosova -- at that time the former Yugoslavia, the Federation, still existed, and that being the case, Kosova too being either a republic or an independent country, would have relations with the other republics. That was being discussed. But this did not happen, of course. As to the Belgrade authorities, they considered what we did, the expression of the will of the people, unlawful, and never recognised it. That was the background. And we continued our efforts to build up the state and the institutions despite the Serb violence. What we did was recognise outside as a parallel state. That was the beginning of the dismemberment of the Federation, in fact.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So Belgrade's attitude to you was driven by their ⁴²⁰⁶ non-recognition of the status that you had declared yourself? They did not recognise that status and continued to treat you in the way that they had treated you before?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct. They didn't recognise the Republic of Kosova. I said in March 1989 they suspended even the federal status that Kosova enjoyed then. So they didn't recognise the people's expressed will and continued their repression, violence, and other actions in this way.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. Let me turn, then, to the Ministry of Defence, as it has been described. Very briefly, how did this come into being, of whom or of what was it composed, and what was its purpose?

A. In 1992, 1993, we believed that those policemen who were dismissed, they were organising their police trade unions. They took care of their families. And they thought to set up a Ministry of Interior, where Kosovar Albanian unemployed officers or policemen -- they thought to have their own Ministry of Defence. But in fact it did not play any operational, military role, because it was very difficult to do so. It had more of a consultative character, to advise the citizens in case of some attacks or what to do, as the case was in Drenica, for example, in 1998, with the Jashari family or other families. In 1993, many military experts were imprisoned and sentenced. About 46 of them have suffered in prison until 1999.

Many Kosovar police were killed. Some were maltreated. About 150 ⁴²⁰⁷ have been sentenced to gaol. About 200 have been arrested, and they have suffered their sentences until 1988, 1989.

So that was the main purpose for setting up this ministry, as a consultative body to provide some security for the citizens.

Q. Were these former police officers ever recognisable as members of the Ministry of Defence by uniform or badge or anything like that, and if so, were they ever armed?

A. No. No. They didn't have a uniform. It was impossible to have uniforms or some insignia. But as I said, it was more of a consultative body for the citizens of Kosova.

Q. Thank you. Can we turn now to the education agreement. But, Dr. Rugova, we've heard quite a lot about this from other witnesses already, so we can deal with it, I hope, pretty swiftly. There were negotiations for an education agreement, and they began in 1996; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct, in 1996. In the summer of that year they started.

Q. The Sant' Egidio organisation helped by engaging in a form of shuttle diplomacy to facilitate this agreement, and at that time there was --

A. Yes.

Q. -- interest or pressure from other Western governments to wanted to see an improvement in the educational position in Kosovo? I think the agreement was signed in Pristina on September the 1st of 1996.

MR. NICE: And, Your Honours, we have a version of the agreement. ⁴²⁰⁸ It comes from a book. It's not the agreement itself, but if we can just produce that as an exhibit through this witness. It ought to be before the Court.

While it's being produced, I can just explain that the book from which it's drawn is "The Kosovo Conflict, a Diplomatic History Through Documents," edited by Philip Averswald and David Averswald, published in 2000.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit number 127.

MR. NICE: If you could lay an English version of this on the overhead projector, please. And the witness reads and speaks English sufficiently for me to just deal with this in English. I think the usher has the wrong document. It's the one-page document. I'm sorry. I hadn't checked.

JUDGE MAY: You're going to produce this one, are you?

MR. NICE: I'm going to produce that one in due course.

JUDGE MAY: So we can keep it.

MR. NICE: Yes, certainly.

JUDGE MAY: But we will renumber it in due course. Let's now have the document, the new one.

MR. NICE: Sorry. I hadn't been keeping an eye on what was being distributed.

THE REGISTRAR: So this document will be Prosecutor's Exhibit number 127.

MR. NICE: ⁴²⁰⁹

Q. It's sufficiently short to be read in full. It's dated the 1st of September of 1996. The original is said to have been signed by both yourself and the accused. Did you sign it in the presence of each other or did you sign it separately, Dr. Rugova?

A. This document was signed separately. I signed it in Prishtina in the presence of Sant' Egidio, whereas the accused has signed it in Belgrade. I don't know whether he too signed it in the presence of Sant' Egidio.

Q. In any event --

A. It was, as I said, a shuttle agreement.

JUDGE ROBINSON: In what capacity did you sign it, Dr. Rugova?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was a very controversial issue, in fact. I had to sign it, of course, as the President of the Republic of Kosova, but the other side didn't accept that. And in order for us to make some positive step ahead, I agreed to sign it only by my name, as Ibrahim Rugova without any other posts or any other capacity, just to show my goodwill to do something.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, I see that, and I think I'll come back to this issue of the constitutional relationship, which I'm not entirely clear about, because although the Yugoslav -- the Belgrade authorities did not recognise the status that you had given yourself in 1990, it is clear that they were dealing with you. They were treating with you in many -- in many things, including education by way of this agreement. But as you said, there was this issue as to the capacity in which you -- you would sign. So we simply see "Dr. Ibrahim Rugova." ⁴²¹⁰ Thank you. Proceed on, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE:

Q. The agreement reads: "For some years now, the educational system in Kosovo - from elementary schooling to university - has not been functioning normally. "By mutual consent, the undersigned, Mr. Slobodan Milosevic, President of the Republic of Serbia, and Dr. Ibrahim Rugova, have decided to proceed to the normalisation of the education system for Albanian youth in Kosovo.

"The agreement foresees the return of Albanian students and teachers back to schools.

"The present agreement, because of its social and humanitarian significance, is beyond political debate. The concern shared by both of the undersigned for the future of Albanian children and youth that has led them to reach this agreement.

"Both the undersigned thank their joint friends from the community of Sant' Egidio for the generous commitment, help and support they have given to the dialogue.

"Both the undersigned are furthermore certain about the commitment of all those who are in charge to implementing the agreement for the normalisation of the education system. A mixed group (3+3) will be established to make the agreement a reality.

"When young people do commit themselves with purpose to their educational and cultural improvement, and in so doing become responsible citizens, we achieve a victory for civilisation itself and not a victory ⁴²¹¹ of one side over another."

Thus the agreement, Dr. Rugova, was it ever implemented?

A. Unfortunately, it was not implemented. And for this reason, we had protest demonstrations by students in October 1997 and again in 1998. Part of this agreement was implemented very late, in March or April 1998 when it was very late. And one faculty building was released for Albanians and the Institute for Albanian Studies in the national library, but this was very late and, in fact, it seemed like a farce. So this agreement was not implemented.

Q. Had you ever been hopeful that it would be implemented?

JUDGE MAY: There is an objection, apparently. Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I consider that this is the right time for me to point something out. By presenting Exhibit 127, this has been introduced into the documents but it has not been translated as it should have been done. You still have not decided about this, that is so say, whether documents which have not been translated can become a part of the evidence.

Now, what do I want to say about this? I wish to say that a ruling on the matter should be made, because we discussed the question of whether the accused knew the language well enough to be able to follow the documents. He presented his own views. It is not a question of a general knowledge of the language when we come to legal terminology and witnesses, expert witnesses, professional terms that are used. The accused quite certainly does not know all that legal language. So I think we ought to ⁴²¹² have a ruling and decision on whether a document which has not been translated can be introduced into evidence.

JUDGE MAY: This is a short document which the accused is well able to read. If you want help about it, I'm sure at that Mr. Wladimiroff will assist you.

We are not dealing now with matters of principle. You can raise them in due course. The important thing is to get on with the evidence. Now, in this case we can get on perfectly well with this document in English.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't think you understood me. Your Honours, it is not me --

JUDGE MAY: We have in front of us a document about education, and it is that document which has been produced, and it is that document which I'm referring to. We haven't got on to any other document. When we do, we can discuss it. But we don't want to waste time when the witness is in the middle of giving evidence.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I just add one thing? I don't need assistance. I do have this document in the Serbian language, and I know it very well. I read it a long time ago, many years ago. I'm well acquainted with the document itself. So it is not I myself who needs assistance. But we must rule on the request made by the accused that every document which is provided to him in the English language must also be produced in the translation as well.

That is all. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: It is a matter for us when we rule upon the matter. ⁴²¹³ At the moment we're dealing with the education agreement. There is no need for any ruling. Now, let us get on with the evidence.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Of course.

MR. NICE:

Q. Had you ever had optimism, Dr. Rugova, that this agreement would be implemented?

A. I had hoped, but on the basis of the attitude taken in Kosova towards education, there was some goodwill and hope that something would come of this agreement.

Q. In the event, what appeared to be the approach of the Serbian side to education and its effect on Kosovo Albanians?

A. As I said before, in 1990 and especially 1991, the schools were closed, and the university, so there was no Albanian-language education, and we organised in our own way in private houses. So they had a negative attitude: There should not be Albanian-language education in Kosova. And with this agreement, we thought something better would come about, but nothing happened. And of course there was violence used against school pupils and teachers, and repression.

MR. NICE: We can now move to the negotiations that took place involving a group called the G5. We've had a great deal of evidence about this already, and Your Honour, I think the general architecture of these negotiations has not been challenged at all, so that I can lead it.

Q. After the Kosovo parliamentary elections that were held on the 22nd of March of 1998, was a group formed --

A. Yes, a group was formed, which at first was called G15. It had 15 ⁴²¹⁴ members.

Q. Yes. And was its purpose to start the negotiation process because conditions were deteriorating and you were concerned about the violence that was developing?

A. Yes. It was our position that we should do something, and also the international community thought the same, because the situation was alarming. So this group of 15 was founded, with representatives of the different political parties, civil societies, human rights organisations. So it was quite an interesting and a rather solid group, ready to talk to Belgrade.

Q. But then for practical reasons it was reduced to the G5 group, whose members were yourself, Fehmi Agani, Veton Surroi, Mahmut Bakalli, and Blerim Shala?

A. Yes. It was more of an advisory group to look at issues. We also formed a group of five members, as you mentioned, for direct talks, if direct talks were to start. So this was a more practically mounted group, you might say.

Q. And also Pajazit Nushi.

A. Pajazit Nushi, that's right, from the Human Rights Committee.

Q. Now, we know that on the 15th of May, this group met the accused in Belgrade, and I think you were the leader of the group; is that correct?

A. Yes, I was.

Q. The meeting lasted about an hour. You explained that your interest was in independence of Kosovo; correct? ⁴²¹⁵

A. Yes.

Q. And others contributed; the others of your group contributed to the discussion, and the accused spoke of, amongst other things, events in Prekaz. Briefly, please, your recollection of what he said about those events in Prekaz?

A. I remember that he knew about the Prekaz case and the Jashari family and what had happened. He called them terrorists. And he also said that the state had to respond to cases like this. We were there to discuss the situation in Kosova and to find a solution, but this is what he said. I remember exactly.

Q. Did the meeting -- we've heard about it from other witnesses, so I needn't ask you for your recollection of what others said. Did the meeting having a positive outcome, as you understood it?

A. No. No. It didn't have any positive results. We tried to meet at high level, and then at other levels, and we formed two working groups for talks. These were formed later.

Q. Was it possible for those working groups to negotiate with representatives of the Serbian side or not?

A. Very difficult. We tried. We tried.

Q. Very well. When you returned from that meeting with the accused - very briefly - did you come through the border at Medare? If so, what did you see there of vehicles, and what happened to you, and so on?

A. As we were returning from Belgrade, we were stopped by the police, and there were also soldiers. There was a checkpoint at the border with ⁴²¹⁶ Kosova, and the police stopped us for I think about 30, 40 minutes. And they asked for our identity documents and so forth, and this was a sign that they knew where we had been and why. They stopped us there. And of course, there were police and military vehicles. And when we entered Kosova, there were tanks. There was the army on the move throughout Kosova, soldiers, perhaps even paramilitaries, and others.

Q. And on the day after, was there a change in the provision of food to Kosovo?

A. There wasn't, but in fact Belgrade had decided to stop the trucks that were bringing food from Serbia, and those belonged to various firms that sold groceries. And this was a bad sign. At that time it didn't have any effect, because we had our own production, but it was an ominous sign. And of course, we are also trading with Macedonia. But this was a very negative sign.

Q. Shortly after this meeting, was there a particular event around Decani that you recall and can tell us about in a sentence or so?

A. After this, I believe in a certain part of Decan, in the village of Gllogjan, on the Gjakova side of Decan, there were confrontations, and as a result, people, also displaced people, left their villages, and people started to cross the border into Albania and Montenegro.

Q. I should have asked you, and I'll go back to deal with it: In your meeting with the accused, what, if anything, did you say to him about the violence and oppression that was happening in Kosovo?

A. We said that the situation in Kosova was bad. There was violence and repression. And he, of course, justified it by saying that the state ⁴²¹⁷ must respond, because these were terrorists. And of course, I also mentioned the issue of independence, as you did yourself.

Q. Let's move on now to the following year, to Rambouillet, in February 1999. This, of course, followed the incident, massacre, at Racak.

A. Yes.

Q. You participated in the Rambouillet negotiations?

A. Yes, I took part --

Q. In summary --

A. -- as part of the LDK.

Q. Was the LDK delegation serious in its attempts to negotiate or not?

A. Yes, we were serious, and we went in the conviction that an agreement must be achieved. And this was the stand of the international community too, after the massacre at Recak. The situation was deteriorating in Kosova. And of course, the Kosovar delegation consisted mainly of the LDK, including myself, and other political groups. There was the movement for democratic unity, and the KLA, and other civil societies, and there were two other members. So there were about 15 members in this team. So the LDK position was that an agreement should be achieved, and the other members of the delegation shared this view.

Q. The approach of the Serb side, as you could judge it from your position?

A. Most of them were not serious. It appeared to me that they were not there in order to reach some agreement. That was our impression, ⁴²¹⁸ given the way the talks were being held, or the process, in fact. Because we didn't have many contacts, but these negotiations -- the process continued for three weeks and we didn't see any willingness on their part to reach some agreement.

Q. Eventually -- and I'm going to cut out the detail. It's available in paragraphs 46 to 48, if wanted. But eventually, was there a meeting with Madeleine Albright, I think three Albanians and three Serbs together?

A. Yes. We held this meeting, about two weeks or so of negotiations. There were three from our side and three from the Serb side. Mrs. Albright was sad at the way the negotiations were going, and she said very openly and explicitly, without much diplomacy, that: If you Albanians - that is, Kosovars - fail to agree with the agreement, we will isolate you and we will have nothing to do with you. And she said likewise very clearly to the Serb side: If you do not accept the agreement, you will be bombed. And that was the end of the meeting.

Q. The agreement that was being proposed --

MR. NICE: And Your Honour, it was the previous exhibit that was distributed ahead of its time, and perhaps we can give it a number in due course.

Q. The agreement that was available, in summary, said what, Dr. Rugova?

A. In summary, it said that over a three-year period, the situation in Kosova should be ameliorated; that is, the status of Kosova should be raised after three years, on the basis of the political will of the people and of other factors, that the Serb forces should withdraw, Kosova police ⁴²¹⁹ should be set up, and KLA should be disarmed, that it be transformed after disarming, and then peace-keeping troops of NATO should be deployed. That was more or less what it was about.

Q. On the way to the formulation of this agreement at Rambouillet, were the Serb delegation free to negotiate with real authority or did they have to refer back at any time to anyone, and if so, to whom?

A. Certainly they had to ask Belgrade. In this context, the Hill ambassador, who was one of the negotiators, went twice to Belgrade. Once the accused met him, the other time not; he didn't. But the members of the Serb delegation kept constant contacts with Belgrade to get authorisation for what they were going to do. That was our impression.

Q. Were you aware of them actually making physical trips, actual trips to Belgrade, in the course of the negotiations?

A. It seems to me, yes.

Q. Once or more than once, if you know?

A. I don't know, but someone went there. This I know. During that three-week period, we stayed in Rambouillet. We stayed there for 21 days.

MR. NICE: Your Honour - thank you - the agreement, may that be given an exhibit number, if it's going to be given a different one from --

THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. That will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 128.

MR. NICE: I don't desire to turn to any part of it in detail at the moment, but it's a document of reference that we may obviously wish to look at from time to time. Again it comes from a book. Of course, if ⁴²²⁰ Mr. Tapuskovic has got a version of it in B/C/S, no doubt he'll make it available to us, if he feels that it's necessary.

JUDGE MAY: No doubt the accused is familiar with it, but in principle, we should have a copy in B/C/S.

MR. NICE: We'll see if we can find one.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. There must be one somewhere.

MR. NICE: It's a question of finding it, yes.

Q. Tell us about the decision to sign this agreement or not then, please, Dr. Rugova.

A. After three weeks, we put up together a text through this shuttle method. It was a definitive text, and the moment came when each of the delegations had to say whether they agreed with the agreement. The Kosova delegation - that is, the Albanian delegation - despite certain reservations of given groups, we decided, within our delegation, we decided to accept the document, whereas the Serb side didn't come up with any stand. We had a time-out of three weeks, to meet again in Paris to sign it. But that was the final document, and the question was whether to accept it or not. That was the end of the -- the conclusion of the Rambouillet talks.

Q. The Serb side never signed?

A. After three weeks -- we made public the content of this document in Kosova. Then after three weeks we went to Paris. The Serb side again refused to sign it. We did sign it, as a delegation.

Q. You then returned to Kosovo, knowing or fearing that what would happen, Dr. Rugova? ⁴²²¹

A. Yes, we returned to Kosova. And we, of course, were afraid of the future, but also were hoping that there would be some intervention by NATO, given the fact that the other side was cautioned against it. But we were frightened that some even worse things might happen. We did our own share of work. We did our bit, so to say. That is, we signed the agreement, and that was of importance to us.

Q. As you returned to Kosovo, did you calculate that you may have been at some personal risk?

A. Yes. I was afraid that the situation might be dangerous in Kosova, but I had made up my decision to return, because my family was in Prishtina. And on the way from Skopje to Prishtina, I saw the first bad signs, that some cities and villages of Kosova were being emptied of their population.

Q. On your return, did you make a press statement?

A. Yes. I was very worried at what I saw from the border with Macedonia on the way to Prishtina, and as I told you, I saw many empty, deserted villages and cities. Han i Elezit was on the border of Macedonia. I remember to this day two little puppies wandering in the streets, and nothing else. And so I made a statement in front of my house, in the presence of many journalists, telling them that it's high time that NATO took some action, that something must be done. That happened on the 20th or 21st of March, 1999.

Q. Were you in your house when the bombing in fact started?

JUDGE MAY: If you're moving on to another topic, it may be convenient to break. ⁴²²² Dr. Rugova, we're going to adjourn now for half an hour. Could you remember, please, in this adjournment and any others there may be while you're giving evidence, not to speak to anybody about it until it's over, and that does include the Prosecution. Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, certainly. I will abide by your Rules.

--- Recess taken at 11.00 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.30 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE:

Q. Paragraph 55. Dr. Rugova, were you in your house when the bombing began, with your wife and three children, later to be joined by your sister-in-law with her husband and their three children?

A. Yes. I was at home with my family and with my brother-in-law. I was at home with my family. And meanwhile, my brother-in-law had come there with their children.

Q. Thank you. Before the bombing began had the telephone lines ceased to work, and if so, why?

A. Yes. All telephone lines were cut in Prishtina, no doubt in Kosova as a whole, no doubt to ensure that nobody could communicate with anybody else. And on the 22nd and 23rd, the city was under blockade and all movement was very difficult.

Q. Your own political party's office and, I think, the United States' office in Pristina were both subject to the same fate. Namely, what happened to them? ⁴²²³

A. On the first night of the bombing, my office was burned. That's the office of the LDK, which also housed other institutions. And then the US office in Prishtina was also burned.

Q. Was it burned as a result of the bombing or of some other reason?

A. No. No, no. They were burnt by Serbian forces, by different Serbian groups, the army. I don't know who, but they were burnt by groups from the army or the paramilitaries or the police, no doubt in revenge. This was what it was about. And then my office was burnt again because they thought that it wasn't properly burnt.

Q. Did you learn of the death, at some stage around this time, of the lawyer Bajram Kelmendi?

A. Yes. I learnt about two or three days later, because it was very difficult to communicate. And after two or three days later, I heard the news of his murder with his two sons. He was taken on the first night of the bombing.

Q. Did you become aware, difficult though it may have been to communicate or see things, but did you become aware of Serb forces being reinforced by others from outside Kosovo?

A. Yes. You could see these. They were present. And the reinforcement of the Serbian forces started during our time-out period, the three-week period. You could see them on the streets. You could see them from my house.

Q. Were these uniformed people or were they simply un-uniformed volunteers?

A. Some of them were uniformed. There was the military police. ⁴²²⁴ There were soldiers. There were police uniforms. But there were also volunteers without uniforms. I heard later that volunteers came from Serbia and stayed for a few days and did what they had to do and went back.

Q. And what was it that was being done in this period of time by Serb forces with or without volunteers?

A. They were no doubt either working together or in a coordinated manner. They were expelling people and mistreating them, and they also killed people. They -- unfortunately, there were also local Serbs from Kosova, because up until then, the local Serbs had not been involved, but from this point they started to take a part in expelling people from their houses and the like.

Q. Your house was in the Velania area of Pristina?

A. That's right. That's what it's called. It's in the eastern part of the city.

Q. Was there a police presence there? What did you observe?

A. There were police throughout Prishtina, but they also moved around in my neighbourhood.

Q. Were your neighbours allowed to stay in their homes or were they forced out, and if so, where did they go?

A. Two or three days, they stayed in their houses. Nobody went out. But after this time, they were threatened and they were told they had to go out and leave the town. And some neighbourhoods such as Dragodan in the West of Prishtina, they were threatened and they had to leave early. Professor Agani lived there. And then they started in our neighbourhood ⁴²²⁵ too, and people began to leave.

Q. Where did they go to eventually and how did they travel, these people who were forced out?

A. They mainly went to Macedonia by the Hani i Elezit or Gllobocica border crossing points, and also trains were used on the Prishtina-Skopje line. And the military police ordered people to go to the station and board the train and go abroad. And these trains started running crammed with people.

Q. Paragraph 59. On the 31st of March, did four armed -- or three or four armed soldiers break into your house and hold you and your family at gunpoint for a time?

A. Yes. On that day, three neighbourhoods of the city, including my own, were cleansed, and all the people were expelled from my neighbourhood. And finally, some soldiers, three or four or more - it was a whole group - came to my house, and they entered my house. They didn't wait for me to open the door, but they entered by force.

Q. And in your house at that time, there was your family, your sister-in-law with her family, I think, a baby, a journalist from Der Spiegel, and your chief of security, Adnan Merovci; is that right? There may be some others.

A. Yes, those people were there.

Q. What happened after they had broken into your house, these armed soldiers?

A. They were military policemen and soldiers, and they told us to go downstairs. I have an entrance hall. All the people who were in the ⁴²²⁶ house, including myself, they held us there for four hours. They were calm and they were careful, but we were scared of what would happen. And they kept us until 4.00.

Q. The commander, how was he dressed?

A. He was in military clothing and he had a cap. He had a red cap.

Q. Could you identify the unit to which the clothing he had related?

A. I don't know what unit it was. Later I heard it was some kind of legion. But that's what they looked like. Of course, they also had helmets and weapons, semi-heavy weapons.

Q. While the men were there keeping you under guard, did you make requests to leave and to go somewhere?

A. When they told us, after four hours, that we could go up to the first floor and use the living room - they told us that this was the only place where we had the right to go - I said, "Let me go to Skopje. I go abroad to Macedonia." And they were throughout the house, but they said they had no authority to let me go to Macedonia.

Q. At about 6.00 in the evening, did some journalists, mostly Serbs but also some Greek and Turkish journalists, arrive at your house together with the director of the Serbian press centre in Pristina?

A. Yes. Around 6.00 they came and told me that I had to hold a press conference. And I said no, but they insisted. And the state security officer - I think his name was Joksic - was there. And so I held this press conference. There were journalists, mainly Serbs, but there were also some from Turkey and Greece, because the other international journalists had been expelled from Kosova a few days before. ⁴²²⁷

Q. Can you remember in detail, or at all, what you said in the course of this press conference?

A. Of course, they asked me to say -- well, I said that the Serbian security was in my house. In fact, there was also the military police and others. And of course, there was talk in those days that I had gone into hiding or that I had been killed, but I said, "Here I am." And I said that the situation is serious, and so forth. It was very short. It didn't last long, but it was important that they wished me to appear. And of course, they were there with their military hardware and so forth.

Q. A couple of hours later, did other people arrive, this time telling you that you had to go somewhere else?

A. A few hours later the Serbian state security chief that I mentioned came, and I think -- and they told me that I had to go to Belgrade on the following day. Of course, at first I said yes, but they insisted, and I went [as interpreted]. And I went. I said I would go the next day.

Q. Who was it, do you think, who gave that instruction, precisely? The Serbian state security chief, is that the man Joksic?

A. Yes, it was Mr. Joksic. He was the head of the security in Prishtina, I think. Mr. Joksic said that I had been asked to go to Belgrade.

Q. The next day, although you didn't want to go, and I think no reason had been given to you why you should go, did you in fact go to Belgrade?

A. It was not something I wanted. It was not something that I wanted ⁴²²⁸ at all, but the accused had requested it and that was what was conveyed to me. And if I hadn't gone, there would have been consequences and there would have been other steps. So therefore, I agreed to go on the following day.

Q. Did you travel in a police vehicle, with military personnel and a driver and the man Joksic present, with some other official cars as well, and did you leave at about 7.00, arriving at the accused's palace, Beli Dvor, about noon, and did you then meet the accused?

A. Yes, that's what happened. We set off at 7.00 in the morning.

Q. If I've got it right, just say "yes" and we'll move on to the next question.

A. Yes.

Q. When you met the accused, how long did you spend with him? What passed between you?

A. It seems that -- to me that it was about 12.00, and we spent 40 minutes to an hour together. And of course I told him about what was happening in Kosova and some people I was concerned about such as Professor Agani, and the accused listened to me and suggested that we should issue a statement for the press. I was not very interested in this, but he insisted. And this was a statement for the press which, according to him, had to be signed. I didn't see any reason to sign, but nevertheless, I said we can do this. And then the television was there and made some films.

Q. Now, pausing there a minute, a little bit more about what passed between you and the accused. Before we come to that, was Merovci there as ⁴²²⁹ well?

A. No. At the beginning it was only myself and the accused. Then Merovci came later, joined us later, as well as the chief of cabinet of the accused, I think, or secretary.

Q. Can you remember his name?

A. No. That I can't remember.

Q. First of all, what was the accused's attitude insofar as he expressed it as to what was happening with the NATO bombing and so on?

A. He was upset, of course, about the bombing, which was what happened in his view. I said to -- I told him about what happened in Kosova. He accused the international community for that.

Q. Well, now, you told him what was happening in Kosovo. In particular, what did you tell him? You've told us about Agani. Did you mention any other people by name? What did you tell him in general about what was happening in Kosovo?

A. I mentioned some names like Agani, my associate; Mustafa Gashi, about whom we didn't know what was happening. And I informed him of what was happening in Kosova, that people are leaving the place and so on. I gave him a general picture.

Q. You've told us of what was being done by way of crimes committed against the people. Did you make any mention of that to him?

A. I made some mention, but he certainly knew. In fact, I didn't go into details, but I mentioned them, what was happening those days.

Q. And in particular, because we need to know what it was you told him, what did you tell him of what was being done in Kosovo by Serb forces ⁴²³⁰ or those working with them?

A. I expressed my concern over my associates first, and told him that people are being driven out of Kosova by military and police forces and other groups. I asked him to find out what was the matter, to do something, and he was listening to me.

Q. Yes. You told us, I think, that people were also dying and being killed, is that right, at this time?

A. Yes, there were some who were killed. Some left, some injured.

Q. Did you explain this to the accused?

A. I mentioned them. I didn't go into details.

Q. Now, the lawyer Kelmendi, were you aware of anything about him at the time of this meeting with the accused?

A. Yes. I knew that he was kidnapped and he was executed. I found that out later. Yes, I knew.

Q. Was his name mentioned at all in this meeting?

A. It seems to me yes, yes.

Q. Insofar as you named people, Agani or your other colleagues or possibly Kelmendi, did the accused give any particular response, saying whether he knew what had happened to them or whether anything had happened to them or whether nothing had happened to them?

A. He did -- he didn't say that he knew about that. I don't know. I believe he knew. He just told me that, "I will see about it." I believe he was already informed.

Q. Now, let's come to the agreement that he wanted you to sign. Were you willing to sign -- ⁴²³¹

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nice. Dr. Rugova, it's about the general picture you say you gave the accused at the time. You said earlier that you didn't get any information of what was happening then. How did you get that information apart from some specific persons you personally know such as Agani or Kelmendi? Where did you get that general information, and how did you put it to the accused at that time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. As I said, it was because of lack of communication. There were no telephone lines and no links, but still people came to me. They often came to me, even though with difficulty, and they showed me what was happening. And the radio stations broadcast news. I listened to the radio up to the 31st. Now and again the television, too, was working. So I followed what was saying through the radio-casts and the people, as I said, who came and met me. So this is how I came to know about what was happening in the city.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. The agreement that you signed, can we have a look at a report of it in another exhibit? It comes from a newspaper.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, this is an example of an exhibit where I would ask the Chamber not to detain the original. It's an open-source information. It's a newspaper. We only need it, for these purposes, for the one article that's on the front. The newspaper itself, which is probably the only version we have in the office at the moment, is not copied, and we need the other pages for continuing reference purpose. So ⁴²³² if we can just provide a copy, having provided the original for inspection, that will assist the work of the office rather than lose that source of material.

JUDGE MAY: Provided it's available at any time and provided it's available while the witness is giving evidence.

MR. NICE: Certainly, yes.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit number 129.

MR. NICE: If the usher could very kindly lay the photocopy of the newspaper on the overhead projector first so that we can see the photograph of the accused and the witness and the text of the agreement with the signatures.

JUDGE MAY: What is the newspaper?

MR. NICE: "Politika." A little bit further up. That's perfect.

Q. The photograph there, is that a photograph taken on that occasion, Dr. Rugova?

A. I don't know. It might have been taken that day, but there was also another photo taken from the previous meeting of 15 May 1998. It may be.

MR. NICE: Could we now put the English translation of the Serbian text onto the projector and just read the translation. Thank you very much.

Q. The agreement copied on the newspaper is to the following effect: "President of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic has received Dr. Ibrahim Rugova in Belgrade. In discussions about ⁴²³³ problems in Kosovo and Metohija, it has been fully agreed that they are both committed to the political process and that the problems can be successfully and permanently resolved only through political means." Then there are the two signatures, yours and the accused's. Is that correct? I know you haven't had a chance to review this document before coming to give evidence because it's only just been retrieved, but does that appear to be the agreement you told us about?

A. I can't say. This is an agreement. It is a press release. This is how it was. I don't know how they have described it. But it is, in fact, only a press statement from that meeting. It is more or less the same text.

Q. After that meeting with the accused, did you return with your colleague Merovci to Pristina that evening?

A. Yes. We returned in the evening, at about 6.00 or 7.00 in the evening.

Q. Had you expected your meeting with the accused to be made public or had you expected it to be kept private?

A. I was told that it was -- remained confidential, but the accused insisted that it become public, and then it was publicised, as you saw the statement from that meeting.

Q. And also, was it broadcast on television or anything of that sort?

A. Probably it was broadcast. I didn't have a chance to see it, because my television set had broken down.

Q. Were you informed as to whether it was, and do you know whether they used current or old footage? ⁴²³⁴

A. I was informed then through the radio. I had a radio transistor at home, and then I heard there that they had used another photo, but I didn't see it myself on the television.

Q. Let's move on. On the 2nd of April, some, you describe them as Serb functionaries, came to your house and said they would provide you with food, but in fact you had your own supplies. Is that correct? Just yes or no.

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. And then I think at about this time you were able to fix the satellite dish, so that you could watch CNN; you did have a small radio, so you were able to keep in touch to a degree; and you found yourself occasionally obliged by the local police to go below ground floor because of the risk of NATO bombing. Correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. A little later, and I think you place it at about --

A. They kept telling us to go down, yes.

Q. A little later, and I think you place it at about the 15th of April, the same security officer, Joksic, told you you had to go and meet the then president of Serbia, Milan Milutinovic. You initially declined, but in light of the attitude of Joksic, you eventually agreed, and you went to Belgrade about a week later. Correct? And then again --

A. Yes.

Q. -- you went with your associate and colleague Merovci, under police escort, Joksic being present. You met Milutinovic in his office. Some reporters arrived as well, including members of the international ⁴²³⁵ press, and you were photographed?

A. Yes. First I said I didn't want to go, but they insisted, and they became very aggressive when I first declined. Then I said, "Okay. We may go tomorrow or some other day." But then we went. There was a team from Serb television, some international media reporters who were allowed then in Belgrade. Yes.

Q. What did you tell Milutinovic about what was happening in Kosovo?

A. I told him about what was happening, that Kosova was being emptied of people, that there is oppression, violence committed against people. And he said, "This is the outcome of the international community," the same slogan being used by Serb community all the time, that this is being done by the international community. The fact is that they were actually being driven out by Serb police and military forces, paramilitaries, and other voluntary forces that I mentioned earlier.

Q. Was this meeting also attended by Nikola Sainovic, the Deputy Prime Minister of Yugoslavia?

A. Yes. Yes, he was there present too.

Q. We haven't yet heard about this man, although he was a man that you had seen before this particular meeting, I think, in your own house.

A. Yes. He came once or twice, I think, to my own house.

Q. Tell us: What was Sainovic's position, as you could understand it, in Kosovo at this time?

A. He was in the post you mentioned. He was also, I think, responsible for Kosova. He came often and stayed in Kosova. Before the war and during the bombing he was present in Kosova. I can't tell you ⁴²³⁶ what exact office he held, but I know that he was responsible for Kosova.

Q. Were you aware of anybody in Kosovo having more authority than Sainovic?

A. I think he had more authority, along with other Serbs, but he was there and he was the most responsible person, I think.

Q. And when he had visited you in your house before your visit to Milutinovic, what had those visits been about? What had he said?

A. He used to talk about general things. We didn't discuss any concrete matters, because it was not an easy thing to talk with him. It was a vain conversation, I would say, just to pass the time. It was not a substantial debate or something like that. He used to come in late evening.

Q. In any event, Sainovic was present at the meeting with Milutinovic, and as you've already explained, there was a desire that you should make some agreement; is that correct?

A. Yes, he was present, but we were discussing issuing a press statement. I think we did give a press statement without signing it. I said that Belgrade has to accept the terms put forward by the international community and NATO. But it was, as I said, a press release, without any signatures.

Q. Later did Milutinovic come down to Pristina?

A. Yes, he did. It was the end of April.

Q. And on this occasion was a document signed?

A. Yes. It was a document, and we did that at his request, that is, at the request of Belgrade. We signed that document. I did that also ⁴²³⁷ outside my own free will, but I had no choice. I had to do it.

MR. NICE: Can we produce this exhibit, please?

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be marked Prosecutor's Exhibit number 130.

MR. NICE: May the copy of the Serbian be placed on the overhead projector first. When that's been viewed -- Serbian first, please. You can see what it is. Then pass it down so that we -- thank you very much. Now can we see the English text, please.

It's sufficiently short, I think, to justify it being read. It sets out that:

"The President of the Republic of Serbia, Milan Milutinovic, and Dr. Ibrahim Rugova have agreed on the following Joint Statement. "1. It is necessary to immediately renew and intensify the discussions begun between the government of the Republic of Serbia and the political leaders of Albanian political parties in Kosovo and Metohija on the political agreement which grants Kosmet extensive self-government, along with the full respect for equality of all citizens in national communities, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia and Yugoslavia. It was noted that such an approach constitutes a basis for a lasting and just solution to the Kosmet problem." Explain the use of the word "Kosmet," please, can you, Dr. Rugova?

A. Yes, I can explain. It was a substitute, if you like, or coinage formed especially after the Second World War for "Kosova," because the name "Kosova" was always used in our history. But after the Second World ^{4238 BLANK PAGE 4251} War, this "Kosmet" came into being. It's -- Kosova is composed of two plateaus, Kosova plain where Prishtina is, and Metohija, as the Serbs call it, the western part, whereas we refer to it as Dukagjin plateau. They have deliberately coined this word to lose the name of Kosova that has been used by Albanians. That is how it came into being, politically motivated of course.

Q. The statement goes on: "Both sides concluded that the talks should be direct, along with the equal participation of all the national communities which reside in Kosovo and Metohija, which is a precondition for achieving acceptable solutions for all who live in Kosovo and Metohija. Direct talks should be a reaffirmation of the strengthening of mutual trust as an essential condition for finding a way out of the current situation. "On the basis of the agreement of both sides, representatives of the international community may attend the talks as guests. "Agreement was reached on the need to establish soon, under changed conditions, the Provisional Executive Council of Kosovo and Metohija which would perform the function of a provisional government until the constitution of the organ on the basis of the Basic Document on Self-Government in Kosovo and Metohija. The composition of the Provisional Executive Council and its internal organisation, and especially the distribution of new portfolios among the administration organs, must take into account the current problems of Kosovo and Metohija."

Well, now, you say you weren't really agreeable to signing that ⁴²⁵² statement. Had you taken any part in any particular parts of the drafting or anything like that?

A. No, I wasn't involved. It was given to me. I had the occasional suggestion, but it was no use. So this was nothing to do with my own will. You've mentioned the name Kosmet, and they wanted to change the name. So they put in this old name of Kosova. I believe in the Middle Ages it was called Dadanija. But to return to the text, I had no influence on it at all.

Q. Also at the meeting, was there a man present, Zoran Andjelkovic, and if so, what was his role in Kosovo at the time?

A. He was present, yes. I think he was chairman of the Executive Council of the Serbian government in Kosova. He was a kind of governor or something like that, but he -- there was a Serbian government that operated at that time in Kosova, and he was present.

Q. We see that the fourth paragraph of the signed joint statement speaks of the establishment of a provisional Executive Council and indeed of allocation of portfolios, as it were. Did that ever come about as something which you were seriously expecting to be involved? Tell us about it.

A. These points were included and it was signed but without any talks at all. Yes. That was the entire declaration. Excuse me.

Q. Throughout that -- that meeting with Milutinovic, what was your expressed view as to your own position? Did you say what you wanted to do, where you wanted to be, whether you wanted to leave?

A. At this meeting and at other meetings, I asked them to allow me to ⁴²⁵³ go abroad via Skopje or Macedonia, and I repeated this question on this day too. I repeated it continually.

Q. Why were you prepared now to leave or why were you anxious now to leave Kosovo?

A. Because at that time, Kosova was emptied. A lot of people had gone, mainly to Macedonia and to Albania. The statistics say 700.000 to 800.000. Prishtina was empty. My colleagues were gone. I wanted to go abroad and continue my work and do something for Kosova from abroad, and also to be with my family.

Q. Apart from being the person who was taken to meetings and requested or required to sign document, were you able to do anything politically in Kosovo at this time or not?

A. No. This was impossible. It was impossible to do anything in Kosova. And this statement was more on paper than anything practical, because the government, the institutions, were not working. The situation was -- there were no people.

Q. Apart from that, were you free yourself to move about or were you under some kind of constraint?

A. No, please. I was -- I was in house arrest. It wasn't said to me, but I was unable to move without permission. And it was only when these people took me and sent me where they wished. In de facto, I was under house arrest. I was a prisoner of war. I don't know about these legal definitions, but I was under a kind of house arrest.

Q. I think at about the same time as the preparation of this signed document, your colleague Merovci had gone to or managed to go to Macedonia ⁴²⁵⁴ where he met with some diplomats. I think you understand that -- you may hear more of this from elsewhere, but he was trying to put some pressure on the authorities in Belgrade to effect your release. Did that help at all?

A. Yes. He was in Skopje and met diplomats to put pressure on Belgrade to allow me to go, and two or three days later, he returned to Prishtina. This no doubt had some kind of effect, because there were demands from abroad, from the EU and the United States and other countries of the world. There were a lot of demands that I should be released.

Q. Were you obliged to go on a further visit to Belgrade, this time to see the Russian Patriarch Aleksey?

A. Yes.

Q. Again was Joksic involved and did you travel in police vehicles with police escorts?

A. Yes. It was in the same way.

Q. Did you tell the Patriarch of your desire to leave Kosovo?

A. Yes. I told him too about my wish to leave. He agreed, but he had no power to make decisions. But I did express my wish.

Q. And then finally, Dr. Rugova, we can come to the meeting on the 4th of May, again in Belgrade, again taken there by police with an escort, where you met the accused. What was the accused's proposal to you at this time?

A. On the 4th of May, he said that I had to be there, and I asked to go abroad. So I repeated my demands at the first meeting of 2nd of April with the accused. And he said I could go, but that my family should stay ⁴²⁵⁵ in Kosova, that I could go and come back. But I didn't agree to this.

Q. [Previous translation continues] ...explanation as to why your family should be detained in Kosovo as a condition for your being allowed elsewhere?

A. He no doubt wished to place a condition that my family should remain in Kosova, and so I didn't agree. And then the accused changed his mind and said that my family could come with me to Italy.

Q. And were arrangements made that your family came first to Belgrade, for onward travel to Italy on the 5th of May?

A. Yes. They said that my family should come on the next day, and they came. And on the 5th of May, in the afternoon, we flew to Italy.

Q. Had you learned at about this time of the death of your colleague, Fehmi Agani?

A. Yes. It was on the 6th of May that I heard, in Rome, that he had been executed by Serbian soldiers or paramilitaries, and that was when -- then we heard that some kind of group of Djiletovic [phoen] or something had executed him. And this was very bad news for me, and we heard that on the following day.

Q. Just a couple more questions, Dr. Rugova --

JUDGE KWON: Dr. Rugova, at the meeting, apart from your departure problem, what did you talk with the accused, at the last meeting?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Besides these problems, we didn't say anything important about Kosova. A few matters of history and things like that. But there was nothing of substance.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. ⁴²⁵⁶

MR. NICE:

Q. Dr. Rugova, what would have been or might have been the effect on your political standing of the documents that you had been asked to sign?

A. Of course, they thought that they could compromise me politically and discredit me in the eyes of the Kosovar public, the Albanian public, and they also wanted to foment conflicts on the Albanian political stage among Albanians. This was no doubt the purpose of this exercise, the purpose of what they were doing to me.

Q. If those were the purposes, were they effective? Did these things happen? Were you discredited or not?

A. No, it didn't happen like that. This was shown in the local elections held in 2000 in Kosova, and also the general elections held last year, when my party won a majority of the votes. So it didn't have an effect. Of course, it was a serious matter, but it didn't have an effect, because the people decided by their votes.

Q. I think we can conclude in this way, Dr. Rugova: You continued your political work in Italy and in other European countries. On the 5th or the 6th of June you met Madeleine Albright, on the 10th of June you signed the NATO agreement, and on the 28th of July you returned to Kosovo. Correct?

A. Yes, that's quite correct. Thank you.

Q. Thank you. You will be asked some further questions.

A. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. ⁴²⁵⁷

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now it's on. As I was saying, before I start my cross-examination, I would like you to give me a clarification, please. A short while ago, Mr. Nice explained, when providing this document, that this is a public source of information, and therefore there is no problem of making it accessible, regardless of whether it's an exhibit or not. The agreement of Rambouillet is also a public source of information, and I cannot know whether this document that is given, on so many pages, is actually the agreement from Rambouillet. See how many pages there are. The Rambouillet agreement is in archives of Serbia, of Yugoslavia, and of the Provisional Council of Kosovo and the Assembly of Serbia, et cetera, et cetera, and --

JUDGE MAY: Let us get a copy in due course of the original, but for the purposes of this examination, we can go along with what we've got.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course. I just wanted to put in this objection so that some day somebody would not come up and say that this is an authentic document.

Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Rugova, do you think that you personally and the Kosovar Albanians were used as a means of implementing the interests of the great powers? Yes or no.

A. No, we were not used. The great powers and the international community came out in our defence, in the defence of human rights, the rights of a people, like that of Kosova, and to save them from the ⁴²⁵⁸ massacre that was being perpetrated by Belgrade and by you against them. No people can be used by someone else. That is the truth.

Q. Well, history gives many examples to the contrary. But when you say "the people of Kosovo," in all these statements of yours, including your examination-in-chief today, you are referring to Albanians only, aren't you?

A. No. No. I'm sorry. I did not refer only to Albanians. I referred to all the citizens of Kosova. Even in the constitution of Kacanik, that of 1990, that is also stipulated, that the others too who live in Kosova, the other ethnic groups - the Serbs, the Bosnians, the Turks, the Romas, and others - will have equal rights. This is mandatory in the constitution, as well as in the other documents. The same can be said of the elections of 1992, where Albanians mostly turned out, but the Bosnians, others, maybe some Serbs, also took part in those elections. I can't rule that out. There it was said -- and we even left 14 seats in the Albanian parliament, which numbered 114, which means -- 140. So we had also the seats for Serbs, for them to be integrated, to enjoy equal rights, to be citizens of Kosova. And we are going to uphold their rights. And we are saying the same today, three years after the war, when Kosova is free. And they are taking part in all the institutions of Kosova. They have taken part in the election. And this is progress, I think.

Q. All right. We'll move on to that later. I'm going to prove that it was the opposite. But since you said a while ago that NATO had come to defend the Albanian people, and now you define the Albanian people as ⁴²⁵⁹ Serbs, Turks, and all the rest who live in Kosovo, are you claiming that NATO came to Kosovo to defend the Serbs and the Gorani and the Roma and the Turks and everybody else? Is that your claim, that NATO came to Kosovo to protect the Serbs as well? Just say yes or no. Let's not waste any time, because we only have Monday left, and I have a great many things to ask you.

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer.

A. NATO came to defend all, but the Albanians were, of course, being the majority, most in danger. So NATO came to defend all. This is what it is doing today, NATO and the other peace-keeping troops, and also we, with our new institutions of Kosova.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So this defence that you are now carrying out, and all the other peace-keeping troops, 360.000 Serbs and other non-Albanians were expelled from Kosovo, several thousands were killed, several thousands were abducted, precisely under this defence that you have been talking about. Is that right or is that not right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I kindly ask you, Your Honours, this is not very much the focus of my testimony.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, I quite agree. Let's concentrate on events before 1999. That is the time we're talking about. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Do you think that he should not answer my question, the witness?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let's get on with events before 1999 and the ⁴²⁶⁰ events of 1999. You can ask about that, of course.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, this witness is testifying about the entirety of the political circumstances involved, and he has provided assessments of the most complex issues that are relevant to the region of Kosovo, and my cross-examination cannot be limited to a particular period or particular questions that he can or cannot answer. I think there's no point in you trying to defend him from such questions, or rather, giving such answers. You can do whatever you want to do, as you most certainly will, but I want to object.

Q. So you think --

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: You will not be limited in asking questions about the evidence which he gave, and it's right he did cover a lot of ground. You can ask about that. What you can't do is to take the evidence way beyond anything which is relevant, and on that you'll be stopped.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] At any rate, in his statement he mentioned the role of NATO and the role of what he calls the international community. So in relation to the role of NATO and the role of what he calls the international community, I can ask him without any restrictions.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, but don't harp on events now. What we're concerned about is events before and during 1999.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please. Did the witness say that NATO was there to protect all citizens? That is precisely what I'm questioning, that position of his, because under this alleged protection, ⁴²⁶¹ the most horrible crimes have been committed against Serbs and other non-Albanian people. The thousands of persons were killed --

JUDGE MAY: What is the relevance to this indictment? It's no good shouting. What is the relevance to this indictment?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance is that this is an act of aggression against a sovereign country, an act of terrorism, internal terrorism which was supported by this aggression. This is an act of support to illegal decisions.

Judge Robinson asked the witness about the relations involved within the framework of the constitution of Yugoslavia under which this illegal Republic of Kosovo was establish. He is going to get answers to that question. The witness will have an opportunity to answer all of this.

So all of these questions were indeed raised during his statement. They were raised. They were mentioned. And I'm sure --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. What was mentioned, of course, is relevant, and you can ask questions about it. But don't ask questions about what is happening now. That's irrelevant. Now, do let's get on with this.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please let us make things quite clear. What is happening now shows the true intentions related to the events that were taking place then. That is the core of the matter. Because in politics, things are measured by their consequences. The consequence of the policy of aggression against Yugoslavia is what is happening now, not what was happening then, especially not what was being stated then. ⁴²⁶²

JUDGE MAY: We will consider your argument. Meanwhile, you're confined to what happened before and during 1999. We'll consider the rest of the argument.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you believe that Serbs are going to give up on Kosovo and Metohija altogether, Mr. Rugova?

A. I believe they will, and they should give up and Kosova. And I apologise to this distinguished Chamber, because we are going rather into dry political debates and phrases. Kosova belongs to the Kosovars. That is the Albanian majority, the Serbs of Kosova, the Bosnians of Kosova, the Turks and others who live there, because Kosova used to be an entity, a former member of the Federation. So I don't know what Serbs are you talking about about giving up Kosova. But if you mean Belgrade, it should give it up because Kosova belongs to the Kosovars. And the sooner you do that, the better we'll be.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. This again is going a long way from the indictment.

Mr. Wladimiroff, perhaps you can give us some assistance on this matter. Now, if you would consider during the adjournment the argument raised by the accused as to how wide his cross-examination should be allowed to go, we'll hear you after the adjournment. And if the Prosecution want to add anything, we'll hear it. Clearly it's a matter of principle as to how extensive the relevance should be and what is relevant to this indictment. ⁴²⁶³ Meanwhile, Mr. Milosevic, you're confined to events before and during 1999.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Since I have received this answer now, I cannot be limited in putting my questions in terms of the answers.

JUDGE MAY: It is you who introduced these potentially irrelevant topics. Now, would you go on to what matters which are relevant if you want to continue with this examination.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I certainly intend to show through this examination that things are actually quite the opposite, Mr. May. Now I'm going to move on to those years.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, is it correct -- is it correct that the so-called KLA, in 1998, was primarily a group of unrelated groups without a unified command?

A. The KLA, as I said, came into existence as a response to the violence exercised in Kosova over long year period. Initially they started up as individual groups, but then they got together, were unified, had their command, joint command, during 1998, especially by the end of 1998 and early 1999.

Q. Oh. So before that, you -- do you think that what I said, rather, is correct or not?

A. I already stated that. What I'm saying is what the truth is.

JUDGE MAY: The question was -- the question was: Was the KLA primarily a group of unrelated groups without a unified command? Can you assist us on that, Dr. Rugova, or not? ⁴²⁶⁴

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Initially they were unrelated groups, that is, groups that wanted to protect the people and to provide security. And it was very difficult for them to have a unified command right at the beginning. But as the time passed, they united and had a joint command. This is what I know about that. They were more organised afterwards.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Is it correct -- is it correct that these were criminals who were financed, trained, and supported by foreign services, primarily the German Secret Service?

A. No. No, that's not correct.

Q. Was the KLA a terrorist organisation?

A. No, it was not a terrorist organisation. It was an organisation composed of people who responded to violence and repression exercised over a long time with the purpose of winning freedom for the people. That was their objective.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, since you keep telling me not to make speeches, please try to make sure that the witness doesn't make speeches either, that he answers my questions, rather.

JUDGE MAY: He hasn't been. He hasn't been making speeches. If you keep the questions short, no doubt we can get short answers too.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He could have given just a yes or no answer to this question. So he is saying no, it was not a terrorist organisation. This speech about them being liberators and whatever was completely unnecessary. ⁴²⁶⁵

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now I'm going to read a quotation to you and now you're going to tell me whether it's correct or not.

[In English] "The KLA was an odd assortment of grouplets, including gangsters, mercenaries, brothel-owners, fascists, and even some who claim to be followers of Albanians' former Marxist leader, Enver Hoxha."

JUDGE MAY: What's the source of the quotation?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The source is the Wall Street Journal, 1998, entitled: [In English] "Soldiers of Misfortune."

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is this definition correct?

A. No.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, who is the author of the article?

JUDGE MAY: What year?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The name is here. The 28th of April is the date, and now I'm going to tell you -- now I'm going to tell you the year as well. The 28th of April, 1999, Gary Wilson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And in future, you are reminded that you must provide the source for all material that you seek to quote. It's only fair to the witness, and, in fact, it's a requirement.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do not understand that it is fair to the witness to tell him in advance what I'm going to cross-examine him about. The point of cross-examination is to show -- I'm not going to define what I meant. You know what I mean. ⁴²⁶⁶

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So did you not answer my question. Is this statement correct or not? Just say yes or no.

A. No. That's newspaper stuff.

Q. All right. Now I'm going to quote something that is not from the newspapers, but it was in the newspapers too, of course, because you told me that the KLA was not a terrorist organisation. [In English] "We condemn very strongly terrorist actions in Kosovo. The UCK, KLA, is without any question a terrorist group."

[Interpretation] Is that definition correct or not?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Where is that from?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This was all over the press. This is the statement of Robert Gelbard, the American envoy to the Balkans at that time in 1998. I could have used any of the media, but I am particularly using the AFP, Agence France-Presse, which quoted part of this. And after all, this was quoted by all newspapers. I can have it sent to you if you wish.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You must identify the source.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I asked whether this statement is correct, and that is the statement made by Robert Gelbard, the US envoy to the Balkans at that time. In all fairness, I quoted it, and I gave the source in my introductory statement after this false indictment that was served upon me here. So I hope you will be able to find it in the transcript as well.

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer. ⁴²⁶⁷ Dr. Rugova, do you remember what it was you were asked, what Mr. Gelbard was reported as saying?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think like this. Perhaps he made a statement of this kind, perhaps not.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Now I'm going to read just a small excerpt precisely related to this particular question, because you have denied that the KLA was a terrorist organisation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, you're interested in this. I see that. The source is a book of Michael Parenta [phoen], entitled "To Kill a Nation." It is in the Library of Congress catalogue in Washington and also in the British library, and it came out in 2000 in London and New York. These are the sources that I'm quoting: [In English] "[Previous translation continues] ...from US Drug Enforcement Administration stated: `Certain members of the ethnic Albanian community ..." I must wait for translation. "... in the Serbian region of Kosovo have turned to drug trafficking in order to finance their separatist activities."

[Interpretation] This is a quotation, Frank Vivano [phoen], "KLA Linked to Enormous Heroin Trade," San Francisco Chronicle, May 5, 1999. And then Roger Boyce.

[In English] "[Previous translation continues] ...drug money linked to the Kosovo rebels."

Times London, March 24, 1999. [Interpretation] Further on, [In English] "[Previous translation continues] ... KLA finance war with heroin ⁴²⁶⁸ sales."

Washington Times, May 3rd 1999 --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness -- let the witness answer if you're putting these matters to him.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is that true or not?

A. It's not true. I have information that people helped the KLA, and other people came out to protect it. And people fought against violence. There can be different views about this issue, but they have always accused Albanians of going in for this kind of traffic, and you can't say this about the KLA in general. So I see these things more as -- these things as gestures made by the accused in order not to go into the truth that we are facing.

Q. Have you finished your answer to this question?

A. Excuse me. I have finished, and I have answered it, Your Honour.

Q. All right. Now I'm going to quote another passage from the same source. What I wish to present here is precisely an attempt to have the public reach the truth, and you know the truth as well as I do.

JUDGE MAY: No need to make a speech. Now, what's the question?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. I'm going to read yet another quotation: [In English] "[Previous translation continues] ... in Kosovo resembles CIA covert operation in Indo-China, Central America, Haiti, and Afghanistan, where rightists, assassins, and mercenaries were financed in part by drug trade. Within a year, KLA rebels were magically transmuted ⁴²⁶⁹ by western officials from terrorists and drug dealers into freedom fighters who supposedly represented the broad interests of all Kosovar Albanians. In 1999, the KLA experienced what the New York Times called a rapid and startling growth, which included considerable numbers of mercenaries from Germany and the United States who sometimes assumed leadership positions."

JUDGE MAY: Yes. That's now enough, if the witness is to answer properly these allegations.

You've dealt with the allegations in relation to the drug trade. It's said that in 1999 the KLA experienced a rapid growth, including considerable numbers of mercenaries from Germany and the United States. Can you assist, Dr. Rugova, with that allegation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honour. In fact, I have no comments on these things. He may read these things all day. These are speculations of various kinds. The fact is that the majority of people in the KLA were people who had come out to defend themselves and their homes. And I can tell you an episode in the attack on Prekaz, in Drenica. This was the first. And then there were many other attacks.

JUDGE MAY: Let him finish. You make these allegations, Mr. Milosevic. He must have the opportunity of answering.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He should answer rather than tell us about episodes.

JUDGE MAY: He is entitled to give us an example, which he's about to do. ⁴²⁷⁰ Yes. You were going to tell us about Drenica and Prekaz.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this context, they were not mercenaries or people of the kind the accused imagines; they were people who had come out to defend themselves. I'm talking -- they were ordinary villagers, 200 people, 300 people, who would come out to defend themselves with old guns, which were really useless against such huge attacks. People tried to defend themselves. So I'm not in agreement with what the accused said, and that is my comment. Thank you, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, no doubt you could call the author to give evidence about these various allegations which are made. Meanwhile, we're going to adjourn. Half past 2.00. And we'll hear the argument about relevance when we return.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Before you go, if the witness does not like what I have been quoting from these books and these sources, you and he can certainly consider that to be my own position.

JUDGE MAY: That's totally irrelevant. Now, we will return again at half past 2.00.

--- Luncheon recess taken at 1.00 p.m. ⁴²⁷¹

--- On resuming at 2.30 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Wladimiroff. I don't know if you're in a position to assist us on this ground of relevance. The indictment date is 20th of June, as I recollect, of 1999. Clearly that's not an absolute date, but it's necessary to bring the case within reasonable bounds.

MR. WLADIMIROFF: Yes, Your Honour. Yes, Your Honour. During this stage of the trial, cross-examination is the only weapon of the accused to challenge allegations against him, but this courtroom is not a political arena. On the other hand, we can't ignore this case is about alleged criminal consequences of political differences. It is no doubt that the witness is an important Prosecution witness in the Kosovo case, an important witness for the accused as well.

The accused has dealt with the -- the witness has dealt with the political differences between him and the accused which relate to criminal behaviour as alleged in the indictment. However, we should remind ourselves that the Kosovo case is, as I said, the alleged criminal consequence of political differences. Hence, nevertheless, cross-examination should be controlled to avoid excessive inquiry into the arena of politics.

We should also remind ourselves that it is not held against the accused that Yugoslavia oppressed aspirations of Kosovars to become independent being Kosovo as part of the Yugoslav Federation or not. It is not charged in the indictment that Yugoslavia waged out conflict in Kosovo. Relevant for the examination, the cross-examination, is that the indictment alleges the accused's responsible for the way Yugoslavia dealt ⁴²⁷² allegedly by violations of humanitarian law with the political differences and especially the actions of the KLA.

In chief, little or nothing was said by the witness about these means and the role played by the accused in relation to that. The evidence --

THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Wladimiroff please slow down for the interpreters. Thank you.

MR. WLADIMIROFF: I apologise to the interpreters. The evidence of the witness is focused on the political role of the LDK, his personal life and involvement in the LDK. For this reason, I believe the accused should be given some room to examine more general issues deriving from the role of the witness and the LDK related issues there too, even if they go beyond the date of June 1999. Where the evidence of the witness is a mixture of historical and political fact and aspirations, the accused should be allowed room to address or to challenge these issues. This flexible approach would also be right, as the accused is entitled to put his case through cross-examination. There may be issues which the accused wishes to raise to which we are not privy to. Clearly it is the case of the accused that the witness, his party, and other Kosovar political groups and especially the KLA was -- raised the issues that led to the indictment or at least caused the issues that may have led to the indictment. May I recall the observations of the amici about the tu quoque defence, at least as a matter of mitigating circumstances.

In sum, it seems to me fair to allow the accused a more in-depth ⁴²⁷³ cross-examination on matters that are indirectly related to the evidence in chief, provided that certain questions are within the ambit of the allegations within the indictment or the limited consequences of it beyond the date of June 1999.

Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you, Mr. Wladimiroff. Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: The scope of cross-examination is really determined by the general provisions of Rule 89 and the particular provisions of Rule 90(H)(i), which says that:

"Cross-examination shall be limited to the subject-matter of the evidence in chief and matters affecting the credibility of the witness and, where the witness is able to give evidence relevant to the case for the cross-examining party, to the subject-matter of that case." It would be our submission that evidence significantly outside the period of the indictment may be relevant under 89, and specifically admissible under 90(H), if it explains or aids in the interpretation of events that fall within the period of the indictment; if it goes to the issue of the credibility of the instant witness, as Rule 90(H) specifically allows; and, possibly further, if it's material that might be of value in discrediting witnesses already called or reasonably to be expected to come. I add that last possibility as one that, although I can't give an example, I can imagine hypothetically might arise where there will be competing views of political events spoken of by witnesses before the Court. But those, in our submission, are the only grounds upon ⁴²⁷⁴ which it would be proper to allow any extensive cross-examination that is significantly outside the period of the indictment.

JUDGE MAY: It's post the indictment period with which we're concerned at the moment.

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE MAY: And the question is: Is it relevant to any case which the accused is trying to put forward?

MR. NICE: I haven't been able to discern one, and in these exceptional rather than standard circumstances, it may be appropriate to require the accused to identify the purpose, although, of course --

JUDGE MAY: I'm sorry. I think he's attempted to do that by saying it was a consequence of political acts. As I understand it, he's saying there was a conspiracy and this was the result of the conspiracy.

MR. NICE: Well, then that might be permissible, if it is modern material, or post-indictment material, going to throw light on relevant within-indictment events.

JUDGE MAY: But clearly limited in its scope.

MR. NICE: Absolutely. And we would respectfully invite the Chamber to consider requiring explanation when any such cross-examination, beyond the odd question, is not immediately obvious in its purpose.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Mr. Milosevic, do you want to add anything?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Every question that I pose here is relevant in order to assess the overall case that we are discussing here at trial. The Kosovo problem is over a hundred years old, and upon it ⁴²⁷⁵ rests the witness, in waging his policy and in his conduct, both in topical events and on historical issues to which he refers. So I do not think that my cross-examination can be limited or restricted in any way whatsoever.

JUDGE MAY: No, but you know the question that we need answered, is this: What is the relevance of topical events to the indictment with which you're charged? How is it relevant, what is happening now, do you say, to the events with which this trial is concerned, which took place before June of 1999? How is that relevant? That's the question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Precisely because we are now seeing events taking place, that is to say, serious crimes against Serbs, on the territory of Yugoslavia, and because those very grievous crimes which are taking place today in Kosovo as well as in other areas, including Bosnia-Herzegovina and especially the Republika Srpska, and so on and so forth - I don't want to expand upon that subject here and now - but it is the direct consequence of an anti-Serb policy that was waged throughout a decade, in an effort to annul and change the consequences of both the First and Second World Wars. And we're talking about --

JUDGE MAY: Let us not go into that for the moment. So what you're saying is this: that the events which took place before the indictment were the result of a policy - and the events of the indictment period - were a policy, according to you, which started some time ago and has continued throughout. So you're saying it's a consistent policy. Is that your case? Perhaps you can say yes or no, as you so often invite the witnesses. ⁴²⁷⁶

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, that is right.

JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues] ...

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We shall allow some limited questions on events now, in order that the accused may develop his defence, but they will be limited. And of course, Mr. Milosevic, as you know, there will be a limit to the time as far as this cross-examination is concerned. The time taken during legal argument will, of course, not count against it. Dr. Rugova, I'm sorry you've been detained during the argument, but we'll go on with the cross-examination.

Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Have I understood you correctly, that you want to restrict my time for cross-examination? Is that right?

JUDGE MAY: It will be as it has been throughout the trial. You know there are limits upon the time available. So perhaps you can get on with some relevant matter.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Would you please bear in mind then when you're thinking about time - and you are the one doing the assessments and evaluations - that for more than half a day we heard the examination-in-chief taking place, plus the fact that we had a very brief piece of material with 85 points, paragraphs, plus ten pages of a witness statement. So all that would make up and constitute at least two days if we were to add it all up. And from the practice of this institution of yours so far, we can see that for far less important cases the examination of certain witnesses went on for as long as three days. So I don't think ⁴²⁷⁷ there's any sense in speaking about restricting cross-examination in terms of time. But let me continue.

JUDGE MAY: In this trial there will be time limits in order to avoid the wastage of time. Now, then, let's move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And you will indicate which of my questions is wasting time. But let me carry on with a specific question, one or two perhaps.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. On the 12th of March, 1999, in the Czech Republic, you received a humanitarian prize and award from the Czech government as the personality of 1998, and the name of it was "Man in Jeopardy." I think that was on the 12th of March 1999, and I'm sure you will recall the event of that award. Yes or no?

A. It was not on 12th of March. It was in December 1998. I got that prize from the association People's in Need. It is a Czech association in Prague. At the end of December it was.

Q. All right. The date is not that important, but it is within a framework. You have set a framework. Now, is it true that at the reception that was given in your honour, some -- the king of these drug bosses was arrested? His name was Dobroshi, and that he was detained and arrested by the head of the Czech central station, Jexi Komerovz [phoen], for drug trafficking? Is that correct or not?

A. No. And I'm not interested in them.

Q. And did you know that that same man, Dobroshi, for smuggling dangerous drugs was arrested in 1993 in Scandinavia, in Norway, in fact, ⁴²⁷⁸ where he was sentenced to 15 years in prison? He succeeded in escaping. In Croatia he changed his appearance and once again entered into this operation that was under the investigations of Interpol?

A. No. I don't know. I was never involved in such things. That was not my interest.

Q. So you haven't even heard of the man, nor do you know anything about the financing, his financing of the KLA, is that what you're saying? Just say yes or no.

JUDGE MAY: The witness has said that it's not his interest, and he knows nothing about it. Now, let's move on instead of these broad allegations.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, this isn't a broad allegation. I hope goes to show the character of the terrorist organisation.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I'm going to quote now the continuation of where I was interrupted a moment ago by Mr. May.

JUDGE MAY: What are you quoting?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll tell you in just a moment. I'm quoting a portion in which -- it is the "US Today," in fact writing, and the date is October 1998, Michael Kosodovski [phoen], "Kosovo Freedom Fighters Financed by Organised Crime." And there is also some indication of some Associated Press images where members of the KLA are bearing arms and German uniforms, and also some other points. But I said a moment ago that if you don't like me quoting, then ⁴²⁷⁹ you can consider the quotation to be a direct answer by me. So I think it was -- what I am saying.

"The KLA was given training sites [In English] supplements of aid and arms by Germany and the United States, Albania, and Islamic fundamentalist organisations, enough to transform it from a ragtag assortment into a well-financed force equipped with some of the most advanced arms."

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova, do you know anything about what is being put to you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I don't know anything.

JUDGE MAY: Just one moment. We'll confer.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, we've been considering whether to rule these questions irrelevant. They're about the KLA. This witness has nothing to do with the KLA, he says. You could put them to a witness who knows something about the KLA. This witness doesn't. He represents a political party, as you've heard. You can ask him about his evidence. But we've wasted a great deal of time with these points being put and these quotations made.

Now, in due course if you want to put evidence before us, we will consider it on these matters, but this way of going on, of putting quotations to a witness about which he knows nothing, is pointless, and we're going to rule it irrelevant.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You don't have to call those quotations. They're my questions. ⁴²⁸⁰ And the second point is the witness himself, as far as I'm able to recall in his statement, says that many members of his party joined the KLA, which means that the witness, who was at the head of that party, did have very much to do with the KLA. I assume that that is not something that is challenged.

JUDGE MAY: You can move on now to another topic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, I would like to ask him precisely the following: Is this what I'm asking now as a question, forget about the fact that it was a quotation --

JUDGE MAY: No. We're not going to allow this questioning. Now, move on to another topic. No doubt there's something else you want to ask the witness about, particularly what he said in evidence.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, does that mean that you are limiting my possibility of asking him about the terrorist character of the KLA?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. You've been doing so for 20 minutes or more. The witness has said he can't help. It's pointless going on. You can ask other witnesses. You can ask -- you can call your own evidence about it, but we're ruling it irrelevant now in this cross-examination.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you know - now, this is a question. It is addressed to you, Mr. Rugova - that here it is mainly members of the KLA and persons under the control of the KLA, I mean those coming from Kosovo, who come to testify here? ⁴²⁸¹

JUDGE MAY: That has nothing to do with him at all. Now, ask another question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And are you conscious of the fact that what is happening now in the long-term just opens the way to new conflicts and not to a solution? So are you thinking about the long-term consequences of it all?

A. I don't know what the accused means by this, but we think that this is a positive development. If you allow me to say a few words without wanting to go beyond the limit.

There is progress made in Kosova which opens the perspective to close the conflict and that new developments in Kosova, with the participation of all ethnic groups and citizens and institutions in Kosovar life, we think will close the path to conflicts. This is what I think. Thank you.

Q. You know that Serbia was not afraid, even when long-term sanctions were imposed or NATO aggression. So do you assume that it will be afraid of this court, Tribunal, which is a means of war?

JUDGE MAY: No. Mr. Milosevic, if you seek to use your right to cross-examination and abuse it by making political comments and speeches, you will be stopped and your cross-examination will be brought to an end. Now, if you want to cross-examine this witness, you must do so properly.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that every question is proper, but let me continue.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. For many years, you said that you always strove for a peaceful ⁴²⁸² road. Now, my question is as follows: Why did you give up that peaceful road? Were you forced to do so by the powers? Or perhaps you didn't even ever believe in it. Which of the two is correct, is true?

A. I have worked and believed for a peaceful solution over more than over ten years, but there is the other option that if there are no results, then anything can happen. Unexpected events may occur, as the case was in this case when Belgrade and the accused were -- did not opt for political solutions. They were given the chance, the opportunity to do so, but they continued the perpetration of violence and suppression with the aim, final aim, of emptying Kosova of its population. And this continued in the last ten years. This was a calmly done cleansing of the population. And then during the war, the conflicts, we all know what happened in 1998 and 1999. That is what I wanted to say. Thank you.

Q. Yes, but in the course of today's examination-in-chief here, you endeavoured, every time, each and every time, to explain how, in practical terms, in none of the meetings, either with me or with Milutinovic, you did not take part of your own free will in those meetings and that you did not consider that some conclusions had to be made. But we'll come back to that later on, the way in which you explained it all. But my question now is as follows: What in those statements which you say you were forced to make was said other than the fact that problems must be solved through peaceful means? Therefore, why are you defending yourself from having signed those statements when all they say is that problems should be solved peacefully?

A. Excuse me. Those were not talks. I was a prisoner and I came ⁴²⁸³ against my own will, as I -- that stands firm. When it was time to reach an agreement at Rambouillet, your delegation, the Belgrade delegation - i.e., yours - paid no attention to this agreement. This was another phase, and this was a phase of the punishment of the side which did not accept the agreement, and it was said clearly at the time that whoever does not accept the agreement will suffer the consequences.

Q. As for Rambouillet, we're going to get to that later. I'm asking you here and now: What motivates you at this point in time to seek justification for yourself in terms of one statement where it says only they agreed that problems at Kosovo would be resolved by peaceful means and political means? Why are you seeking justification? Who are you seeking justification before?

A. This is not a justification; this is the truth.

Q. We'll get to that later too. Tell me: Your first meetings with German politicians, they go back to which period?

A. I had many meetings, not only with German politicians, but politicians of other European countries - France, Britain - the United States, and we talked about the situation in Kosovo and about improving the situation. So I don't believe that this is a relevant question for this case, to my evidence, if I may use legal terms.

Q. I'm not asking you about everybody else, and I'm not asking you about how many contacts did you have. I'm asking you: When did your contacts with German politicians start?

A. If it's relevant, I started in 1989, 1990, when all these countries expressed their concern about Kosovo, and we talked about how ⁴²⁸⁴ the situation could be resolved. I don't suffer from conspiracy theories.

Q. And at that time, that is to say, the early 1990s - and if so, when - is that when you heard the ideas of certain German politicians aimed at the abolition of the Yugoslavia created at Versailles?

A. Excuse me, Your Honour. We might continue. I've never heard any such idea about destroying the peace of Versailles. We're talking about the 1990s, long after the war, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, after the Cold War and the start of democracy in the Communist East. It's a completely different era. It's a time for human rights and freedoms which were being violated. So I don't consider this at all a reasonable question. I don't really want to go into polemics about issues of this kind.

Q. So is it correct that it was precisely after the fall of the Berlin Wall, after the reunification of Germany, these ideas resurfaced, their spectre resurfaced? Is that true? Yes or no.

JUDGE MAY: The witness doesn't agree with the premise that there were any such ideas about, so talking about resurfacing them is a nonsense. Now, have you some further questions?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course I have further questions. And as to whether this was ever said or not, there are statements made by German politicians at that time that the Versailles Yugoslavia should be abolished. But this is not the opportunity for me to present them to you and to spend time on that.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now, in your opinion, Germany's support to your movement at the ⁴²⁸⁵ end of the last century, is that due to the fact that major Albanian units took part on the side of Hitler and Mussolini in the Second World War?

JUDGE MAY: Well, as translated, this question is to do with support at the end of the last century and to do with the Second - I have the question - and to do with the Second World War. It's going well beyond, it seems to me, the scope of the --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not true.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. Thank you. Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And is it true that the Albanian fascist militia in Western Kosovo during the Second World War expelled over 100.000 Serbs and brought in more or less the same number of people from Albania? Is that fact correct?

JUDGE MAY: What's the relevance of this? What is the relevance of these events 50 years ago to this indictment?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance is that it is this same awareness, these same ideas, on the basis of which the Kosovo Albanians formed the Nazi 21st SS Division, which took part --

JUDGE MAY: I'm ruling this irrelevant to the witness's evidence. Dr. Rugova, we're not going to go back this far. Yes. Now, why don't you deal with the matters which he gave evidence about this morning.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, inter alia, he testified about the support that he got from abroad. I am trying to get to the background ⁴²⁸⁶ of that support by seeking his answers. You, for example, say that this is not relevant, and I suggest to you to do some reading in the --

JUDGE MAY: Let's get on with this. Let's get on with the cross-examination.

Dr. Rugova, no, let's not continue this debate. Now, deal with something relevant.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I am just indicating to you that, for example, Foreign Affairs, for May, June 1999, considered these questions relevant. Read Chris Hegis's [phoen] article in that particular edition and you will see why they are relevant. However, you will not allow these questions as relevant, so I am going to continue with questions which I believe you will deem relevant. Because it seems to appear that anybody who ever said anything about this, anywhere in Europe, was not telling the truth, and I've been quoting only Western sources to you.

JUDGE MAY: We are not going on with more and more opinions about history. Now, either you ask relevant questions or this examination comes to a close.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now I'm going to continue with questions that you will not be able to call irrelevant, because they have to do with the witness himself.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Rugova, I am not going to repeat all the information Mr. Nice presented as to where you were born and where you were educated, et cetera. I assume that what he said was correct. My question for you ⁴²⁸⁷ is the following: When you grew up, you became a member of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia. You advocated brotherhood and unity all the way up to 1989; isn't that right?

A. Excuse me. This is also a question that is not really relevant. Of course, I was educated, I was a member of the League of Communists, because it was necessary to have work, to have a kind of protection in society. I wasn't a convinced Communist. And I'm not sure why the accused is interested in this. Because, like many other intellectuals in Kosova and the former Federation, if we want to talk about Communism and its ideas of brotherhood and unity, it was Belgrade that undermined these things and destroyed them. But I don't consider this a relevant issue.

Q. You seem to like this word, "relevant," the word that Mr. May has been using. But I think that it is relevant, because if you listened carefully, I have the right to put questions to you about your credibility. These are relevant questions.

So my next question is: As a member of the League of Communists, in 1988, you became president of the Association of Writers of Kosovo. Is that right or is that not right?

A. Not as a member of the League of Communists. I was elected as a writer. This was a professional association, such as existed in all parts of the former Federation. Of course, I was the leader of this association for many years. It was one of the first associations to stand up for the cultural, national, democratic values of society. Because the accused will remember very well that this was the time when he started his own political career, but I don't really want to go into that. And this was ⁴²⁸⁸ the time when the institutions of Kosova were destroyed, when this process started. But the intellectual associations of Kosova did not surrender, but they raised up their voices to defend the values and the human rights of the citizens of Kosova, most of them Albanians. It's well known that at this -- that time other associations in Serbia tried to close down the Writers Association in Kosova. This was a time when there was talk of democracy around, and the writers talked most. But unfortunately, there was also a talk about Belgrade dominating others. So it was a time -- it was a different kind of time which inaugurated by the events after the Cold War and the onset of democracy. That's all I have to say.

Q. And who was it that asked for closing down the Writers Association of Kosovo? That's what you said just a minute ago.

A. Your Honour, unfortunately, they were colleagues in Serbia. I don't really want to go into arguments and polemics of this kind.

Q. Do I understand you correctly? Are you claiming that it was writers from Serbia who asked for the Writers Association of which you were President to be closed down? Just say yes or no.

A. Yes. I said before.

Q. Very well. Thank you. Tell me, now, the fact that you were an active member of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, did that help you in building your career, for example, at university, at the institute of Albanology in Prishtina, to become the editor of Bota e Re, the students' magazine, and Dituria? Did this help you or not?

A. Excuse me. It was my own work, the things I wrote that helped me ⁴²⁸⁹ and enabled me to make my career, because I was not a professional career communist politician. This was a condition for obtaining work. I'm talking about Kosova, where there were always restrictions. But I have built my career on the basis of my own work and on my moral character. That's all I have to say.

Q. A short while ago you said that you became a member of the League of Communists for reasons of status, so that you would get some kind of protection and certain privileges. What you've said just now, though, does that mean that membership in the League of Communists did not affect your appointment or election to all these posts, positions that I mentioned?

A. I'm sorry, Your Honours, but I consider this irrelevant. I am not here in the position of a student, vis-a-vis the professor. I think we should respect each other.

I said that I built up my career with my work. In Kosova, it was very hard to find a job. In other parts of the former Federation, it was rather easier, but in Kosova the situation was very difficult. So I don't want to transform this discussion into an ideological question, which I've never liked to do.

So in my view, this is irrelevant and is affecting my character and the role I've played. I'm not here in the dock. I am a witness here.

JUDGE MAY: Of course you're not in the dock, and of course you're a witness. But perhaps you could answer the questions if they are relevant. ⁴²⁹⁰

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I said what I wanted to say. I don't have anything else to add.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You were editor of Bota e Re, the student magazine. That means "The New World." Did you have any problems? Did the authorities of Serbia or Yugoslavia put any impediments in the course of your work at the magazine?

A. I don't understand really what it matters here. I worked there. I had problems with the authorities of Kosova because it was a magazine with liberal, advanced ideas, and then it was the Kosova institutions that were responsible for that. But I'm sorry, I really don't see the relevance of this case, this question.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll determine the relevance. We'll determine the relevance. Just answer the question without making an assessment of it, and we'll get on much more quickly.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I answered this question. If someone wants to look at my biography from that moment now, then that's another question. I may answer no, no, no, that's it.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You said that you had problems. Is it correct that parallel to Bota e Re, whose editor you were, that students who took courses in the Serbian language also had a magazine of their own called "The New World," Novi Svjet, and is it true that the Albanian paper was published weekly, ⁴²⁹¹ and the Serbian journal was published once a month and that it had less pages than the Albanian paper had? Is that correct? I know you know this very well.

A. I don't know what the relevance of this is. It was a magazine in Albanian, in Serb, Croatian language. It came out just as many others did.

Q. All right. You were the editor of the paper Dituria as well. Did the authorities ever impede your editorial work at that paper? Did you ever have problems in connection with that, problems put by the authorities?

A. I already answered that question. There were problems related to the introduction of new ideas. Sometimes we were criticised. Various problems, which I don't think are of any importance to this case.

Q. Were they of importance in terms of the publication of your newspaper?

A. It was a scientific magazine published by a group of students, called Dituria, published by the University of Prishtina. We continued to publish it despite the problems.

Q. In 1989, you signed the appeal of 215 Kosovo intellectuals. I think that you mention that in your statement as well. This was against the constitutional amendments to the Constitution of Serbia; is that right?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. All right. This appeal that you signed you called The Appeal of Kosovo Intellectuals; is that right? ⁴²⁹²

A. Yes, that's right. The Appeal of Kosovar Intellectuals. We didn't have a political party then. But after the suspension of the federal status of Kosova, we appealed for this to come to an end. But unfortunately, over 200 -- I think it was 240 intellectuals. They were secretly taken, at the end of March and April 1989, taken to someplace in Serbia, Leskovc and other places, and for three weeks we didn't know about their fate and whereabouts. We just knew they weren't in Kosova. And then we found out that -- someone from the other republics told us that they were in Serbia. They had been maltreated. Some of them died. They were from various walks of life, humanitarian, arts, scientific areas, professors. And thanks to the intervention of international associations, we managed to find out something about that. Some of them were released, but for three months they were detained in Serb prisons, mainly in Leskovc, Belgrade and some other places. They were tried in an arbitrary way.

JUDGE MAY: We're going some way from the question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. We'll get to that later. I don't know. I heard the interpretation into Albanian. It said "three days" and then it said "three weeks", and then "three months." Could it be please be ascertained what the witness said? Is he speaking of three days, three weeks, or three months? Could you please listen to the tapes and you will hear all three versions of the time involved, so to speak. However, since this is the first that I have ever heard of this, of course I couldn't have known about it anyway, but my question is: You ⁴²⁹³ called it The Appeal of the Kosovo Intellectuals, and in response to that you said yes. Now, does that mean that among the signatories, among the signatories there were other intellectuals who were members of other peoples living in Kosovo, Serbs, Croats, Turks, Romas, Muslims, Gorani, or were the signatories only Albanians?

A. I said three weeks. For three weeks we didn't know anything, and then after three months they started to be released. This is what I said. They were mainly Albanian intellectuals.

Q. I'm not asking you mainly, I'm asking you at all. Whether amongst the signatories there were any -- and this appeal of Kosovo intellectuals, were there any Serbs, Croats, Turks, Romas, Muslims, Goranis, et cetera? Were there or were there not?

A. There were Albanians, because repression was exerted against Albanian intellectuals. And like most of the population, they too raised their voice against such things. There were many people who were discontented, but they didn't dare sign that document.

Q. In one of my previous questions I asked you, when you -- when you use the term "Kosovo," "Kosovar," did you mean Albanians, and your answer was no. And now with this specific example, you showed that with the appeal of Kosovo intellectuals, you had in mind just the Albanians because nobody else signed that appeal. Is that so or not?

A. Don't mix up things, please. I spoke about what the Albanian intellectuals did. Unfortunately, there were other intellectuals, Serbs or otherwise, who -- who were not in favour of it. And the accused knows very well what happened in Kosova then. What -- during my testimony, I ⁴²⁹⁴ said that Kosova belongs to all ethnicities. Today the reality is quite different. At that time, the efforts were being made to destroy the relations existing among different ethnic groups. Therefore, we shouldn't mix up things. I was talking about the situation then. Now I'm talking as chairman of a -- President of the Kosova, and I'm responsible for the welfare and the rights of all the Kosova citizens, together in cooperation with UNMIK and KFOR.

Q. And are you responsible for the expulsion of the 360.000 Serbs and other non-Albanian inhabitants?

A. I kindly ask you, Your Honour, if you think it's relevant to go into such a debate. It's not true that so many Serbs have been expelled. A great propaganda was carried out by Belgrade that NATO is coming to kill the Serbs and so on and so forth.

Unfortunately -- I'm just trying to give you an idea. Unfortunately, some local Serbs have perpetrated some crimes. There were over 100.000 police, paramilitaries, voluntary, and Serbs working in different positions as well. So it's not true that they have left, as some people are trying to make it out, as if 500 Serbs have left Kosova. The Serbs have not been there to that extent or in those figures as is being decked out. I said that we are working. Our main objective is to take care of all, and I can assure you that there is progress made. There is greater safety now for all, and for the Serbs as well, to move around the entire territory. But we should not forget the fact that we went through a horror and through a war, and many things happened. But things are moving fast, because Kosovars generally are a tolerant people. Thank ⁴²⁹⁵ you.

Q. Mr. Rugova, that wasn't my question. That was not my question. What I asked you was: Do you consider yourself responsible? Because in the previous answer you said you were the president --

JUDGE MAY: He's answered that.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. -- and that you were responsible --

JUDGE MAY: He's answered it. Now, let's move on. That's enough about the present.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As you claim that what I have said is not true, tell me, please: How many Serbs and other non-Albanian inhabitants were expelled from Kosovo? You tell us here, publicly: How many Serbs and other non-Albanian inhabitants have been expelled from Kosovo?

JUDGE MAY: What period are you talking about, and is it within the indictment period?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the period from -- as leader of the Kosovar Albanians, together with KFOR and UNMIK, as he said, that he bears the responsibility.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So from the 10th of June, 1999, up until the present day, how many Serbs, Montenegrins, Muslim, Croats, Turks, were expelled?

JUDGE MAY: We're going to consider whether this is relevant.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We've heard questions. You've asked questions ⁴²⁹⁶ about the modern situation. You've asked sufficient, and this is going beyond it. Now, have you got any questions about the evidence which he gave? There's been precious little so far the hour and a half or more you've been cross-examining.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I have a great many questions, Mr. May, but in view of the fact I have the right to test the credibility of this witness, and as the witness himself indicated his position and responsibility, then I assume that the witness should know how many Serbs and other non-Albanian inhabitants were expelled from Kosovo.

JUDGE MAY: We are not going to allow the question. We've heard more than enough about this, and it doesn't go in any way towards the witness's credibility. It doesn't go towards the witness's credibility.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And is this question allowed: Does the witness know how many Serbs were killed during that period of time, or abducted during that period? Can he answer that question, or is that forbidden too?

JUDGE MAY: We will allow the witness, if he can, to answer these questions, but that will be all on this topic.

Can you help us, Dr. Rugova, with the expulsion and killing and abduction of Serbs, as alleged, since the 10th of June, 1999?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think this is similar to other questions. I'll try to be brief nevertheless. Following 12 June, some Serbs left Kosova because of the great propaganda made that NATO was going to kill them and so on, when in fact NATO and KFOR protected them. And UNMIK, KFOR and us, we are trying to keep complete records, on the basis ⁴²⁹⁷ of which the Red Cross and other organisations are working, not only for the Serbs but also for the others who have disappeared, whom we have been unable to find out so far. There are about 300 mass graves not yet discovered in Kosova. There may be some in Serbia, like the case was with that of Danube River, Batajnica one. So work is under way in this respect. We don't have exact figures yet. There may have been cases of murders, which we will enlighten and take the culprits before the justice by our courts, which are working, and by other responsible institutions. There are about 4.000 people considered disappeared from Kosova. Most of them are Albanians. But this is not the exact figure, final figure.

Q. And as you say, you know about the Albanians. How many Serbs are considered missing?

A. I said most of them are Albanians, but there are also missing Serbs. The Red Cross has given some figures, but it's not yet definitive. There are some other issues related to it. I think that among the missing, there may be some who are still living - Serbs, I mean, who are in Serbia - because they have not been allowed to communicate with those left behind. So we are working on it and we'll elucidate this issue. We are working on it, as I said, in cooperation with international institutions and organisations in Kosova.

Q. Are you speaking about persons missing, Serbs missing, or Serbs abducted? Are you talking about Serbs who have disappeared or Serbs who have been killed?

A. Please, they may have been killed or they may be missing. I don't know about kidnapping. I don't know in what sense you mean this. ⁴²⁹⁸

Q. I mean the thousands of Serbs killed and the thousands of Serbs abducted and the hundreds of thousands of Serbs expulsed. Those are the crimes I'm thinking about, the crimes that took place in your --

JUDGE MAY: The witness has answered these allegations. Now, go on to another topic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, in this connection, one more question. In view of the responsibility that you alluded to yourself and said you performed yourself, and in view of the fact that this institution here starts out from some command responsibility concept, do you consider to have command responsibility for the killing and abduction of those thousands of Serbs and hundreds of thousands of Serbs expelled?

JUDGE MAY: It's not a proper question for the witness.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you consider that the heads of state or government of the countries who --

JUDGE MAY: No. Now, do you have any more relevant questions, or we're bringing this to an end.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course. I have many more questions. Let me move on to another area, because I see that I am not being permitted to follow this one up.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Rugova, Kosovo, according to the 1974 Constitution, was it a constituent part of the territory of Serbia or not?

A. According to this Constitution, Kosova was a full member of the ⁴²⁹⁹ Federation, with full rights, just like Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, and other republics. Merely it didn't have the title of "Republic," which Belgrade never allowed it. So in 1989, Kosova was suspended from the former Federation.

Q. I'm asking you about 1974 and the 1974 Constitution.

A. But please, this is 1974. This is the 1974 Constitution.

Q. My question was: According to the 1974 Constitution, was Kosovo a constituent part of Serbia or not? Yes or no.

A. It was an integral part of the former Federation, but according to -- with the wish of Belgrade, it was mentioned that it was also part of Serbia, but it was part of the former Federation, as it was in the Constitution of 1946. But Belgrade never wished ever to allow Kosova more. We won't go into other intentions. But it was a full member of the Federation, with all its internal regulations, its internal relations in the Federation, foreign relations, economic relations, and so it had an equal status with the other members of the Federation.

Q. Mr. Rugova, I am asking you about the Constitution, the Constitution that you referred to as well, and I'm asking you that after the Federal Constitution dating back to 1972 [as interpreted] came into force, was Kosovo part of Serbia, according to that Constitution? 1974.

A. Excuse me. This is no longer important, because this state, the former Federation, has now been destroyed and I don't see any point in talking about it. I told you what it was like, what the status of Kosova was, and this was destroyed in 1989.

Q. I'm not asking you about the status of Kosovo and the Albanians in ⁴³⁰⁰ Kosovo; I'm asking you about the Constitution. As know about the Constitution, please answer my question.

JUDGE MAY: You've asked about it and he's given an answer. If you've got a different --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What was it?

JUDGE MAY: If you've got a different answer, you can put it to him.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation].

Q. I asked a very simple question. After 1974, was Kosovo a constituent part of Serbia? I'm not asking you about the Federation --

JUDGE MAY: We've heard it. We heard the question. He's given an answer. No doubt we can look at the Constitution to find it. There's no point repeating the same question over and over again.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I think it is your duty to tell the witness to answer the question and not to say that he has answered the question when quite obviously he has not. I didn't ask him about the Federation; I asked whether it was a component part, a constituent part, of Serbia.

JUDGE MAY: And he's given an answer as best he can. He's not a lawyer.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What was his answer, then?

JUDGE MAY: He's not a lawyer. If you've got some part of the Constitution you want to quote at him, you can do it. Now, let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴³⁰¹

Q. All right, then. As you don't know that, do you know this --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You say he's not a lawyer and therefore need not know the Constitution, whereas he delves in politics.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. But do you know how many national deputies from Kosovo, MPs, were in the Serbian Assembly? Do you? Yes or no.

A. I don't know the exact figures, but just as many -- there were just as many from Kosova in the federal parliament, which had two chambers, from which Kosova was suspended in 1989. And as I said before, Belgrade always wanted Kosova represented via Serbia in the Federation.

Q. Mr. Rugova, I'm asking you about the members of parliament from Kosovo. Mr. Rugova, from Kosovo, there were as many members of parliament as was proportionate to the inhabitants in Kosovo; is that correct or not? Was it proportionate representation? Yes or no. And you can say "I don't know," because that seems to me the answer that the people sitting there in your seat like best.

A. Excuse me. I don't see this issue as being important. There was a federal parliament, and there were more, and there were some in Serbia. I don't know why we're talking about this.

Q. Well, because I asked you whether Kosovo was a constituent part of Serbia, and you didn't want to answer that question. Now you don't want to answer this question. You don't want to say whether the popular deputies from Kosovo were members of the Serbian parliament or not. Were they MPs or were they not?

A. Excuse me. There was the federal parliament, the Serbian ⁴³⁰² parliament, and the Kosova parliament, and I imagine that the accused does not want me to mention the Federation.

Q. And the Municipal Assemblies too.

JUDGE MAY: Just answer the questions as best you can, and we'll get on more quickly.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

JUDGE MAY: We haven't yet got to 1989. You've been examining, I think, for about two hours. We haven't dealt with a single word virtually of the evidence which he's given.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honour. I said, I replied several times, and I think quite clearly, there were Assemblies in the municipalities too under the system which prevailed at that time. So I have given my answer. And I have said that there were deputies in the federal parliament, the Serbian parliament, and the Kosova parliament was made up exclusively of Kosovars, and Kosova was part of the Federation. And of course institutions also functioned in the municipalities, and these were destroyed after 1989 too.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Kosovo, as part of the Federation, was not part of Serbia. Why then did the deputies from Kosovo, from the territories of Kosovo, why then were they members of the parliament?

A. [French translation on English Channel] ...connection with Serbia. I'm not denying this. They left a connection with Serbia. This was an ambiguous Constitution for Kosova. But Kosova was a full member of the Federation like Serbia, with the right of veto like Croatia. This was ⁴³⁰³ the truth. This was the situation as it was.

Q. And according to which constitution [French translation on English channel] ...status of Kosovo made equal to the status of the other republics? [French translation on English Channel].

A. Excuse me. With the Federal Constitution of 1974, which we have been talking about.

Q. If Kosovo had the status of a republic, which is what you're claiming, why then at the demonstrations in 1981 was the main demand for the formation of Republic of Kosovo, Kosovo Republic? Why then was the demand of a Kosovo Republic made if you already had the status? Why would it be made then? You just said that you had that status.

A. I said as a federal unit it was equal, but Belgrade did not allow the name of a republic. And there were talks about it in 1968, and this compromise was found in the Constitution of 1974. This is how the situation was.

Q. Well, how did the Constitution of 1974 define Kosovo? Would you be so kind as to tell me, please?

A. It was more or less as I have said. Otherwise, we have to find a text.

Q. All right. Then answer my next question. It's easy to find the text of the Constitution. Nobody can hide that at least. And everything you have said is not correct. But as you are claiming that Kosovo had the status of a republic, why at the demonstrations in 1981 was it your main demand to have a Kosovo Republic?

A. I said it was a demand to have the name of a republic, but I don't ⁴³⁰⁴ see it necessary to talk about these matters. This is the past. It relates to a state that no longer exists.

Q. But you spoke about the demonstrations in 1981, even during your examination-in-chief this morning.

A. Excuse me. The Prosecutor -- the Prosecutor invited me, and so I spoke about 1981. I believe that the Presiding Judge interrupted me.

Q. As the Prosecutor invited you to talk about 1981 and as you spoke about the demonstrations that took place in 1981 and even mentioned the fact that there was violence, that some 20 people were killed in the course of those demonstrations, this is all something you said this morning, I am therefore asking you that as you claim that Kosovo was a republic within the federation, why was the main demand made by those demonstrations a call for a Kosovo Republic? I'm asking you. I'm asking you precisely about what you were testifying to this morning. So answer my question.

A. Please. The Prosecutor -- neither the Judge nor the Prosecutor asked me to talk about this, but I answered very clearly, I believe. My answer was quite clear. After these demonstrations, there was a gradual suspension of institutions leading up to what happened in 1989. And I don't see the point of going into this more.

Q. Leave me to make the point. It is your duty to answer my questions. And please answer my following question: Was it the principle demand of the demonstrators in 1981, the call for Kosovo, a republic? You are speaking before the world public and the Yugoslav public. Was that the demand made? Yes or no? ⁴³⁰⁵

A. They started a social unrest, yes. The demand was, as I said earlier, that Kosova should have the name of a republic. I answered that. I don't know what more do you want me to say. The Albanians wanted that, and the students as well, to have the name of the republic which Belgrade has never given it.

Q. All right. That means that to my answer of whether the demand was for a Kosovo Republic, your answer was yes. Now, do you know that after those demonstrations by the Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija in 1981, that we saw a big wave of violence against the Serb population unleashing in Kosovo and Metohija? Are you aware of that fact? Yes or no?

A. That's not true. There was a wave, a great wave of violence used by Belgrade. And ever since, there has been a military state and situation in Kosova. The army, the police units came from all the former federal republics. That was the reality. And it's not true that the Serbs were driven out. That's not true. I've come here to declare the truth, but I don't want to engage in polemics. I'm here just to testify to what I know.

JUDGE MAY: It's -- it's now 4.00, and it's time to adjourn. Dr. Rugova, we must ask you to come back, please, on Monday morning to conclude your evidence. Thank you.

Before we do, there may be some procedural matters. Mr. Milosevic, you've had virtually the same time as the Prosecution with this witness. He is an important witness, and there may be some relevant questions you want to ask. We have considered the matter, and we will give you to the break, the first break, on Monday ⁴³⁰⁶ morning. That's another hour and a half. You should tailor your cross-examination with that in mind.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I -- Mr. May, that is absolutely impossible, because I have a large number of highly relevant questions for this witness. And I think that you cannot restrict my time to just an hour and a half on Monday. It is absolutely vital for me to be allowed and enabled to carry out the cross-examination of this witness, because he is not answering questions, he is using up time, and then I cannot ask my open questions quickly and ask him about his testimony. All my questions were relevant to his testimony.

An hour and a half is nothing. And if you add it all up, it's much less than they had with their 85 points, ten pages of statement, and the time spent on procedural matters.

JUDGE MAY: None of -- none of the questions asked or put in that statement are evidence, as you know. That's purely a summary which was produced for the use of the Court. It's not the evidence. The evidence is what the witness gives.

If you hadn't spent so long arguing with the witness about peripheral matters, you would have had more time to put the relevant matters. We have to judge what is fair and what is expeditious, and that's our judgement, and you should organise your cross-examination for Monday morning accordingly.

Mr. Nice, is there some matter you want to --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May.

JUDGE MAY: No. The matter is closed. We're not going to go on ⁴³⁰⁷ arguing.

JUDGE MAY: The -- Dr. Rugova --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, please --

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova, if you would like to go. You needn't stay for the rest of today.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

[The witness stands down]

MR. NICE: Two very short administrative things. Municipality binders. We have already provided them to the amici and would hope that we don't have to reprovide -- provide them again in reduced form for them. Therefore, may we know how many copies the Chamber would find helpful? We've had to reconstitute them and remove the material the Chamber doesn't want. We will let the amici know what we've excised from the fuller versions they have, but may we know how many binders to provide?

The second question --

[The Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Three.

MR. NICE: The second point arising from the same general issue: Can we treat exhibits that are within the binders in the same way as we produced exhibits with General Drewienkiewicz's binder of documents, i.e., comprehensively, and if so, would the Chamber or will the Chamber want us to provide them with exhibits in addition to these contained in the binder or may the binder count as the Chamber's copy?

JUDGE MAY: That will be enough. ⁴³⁰⁸

MR. NICE: That's very helpful. Thank you very much. The second issue. I've been asked to give some words of explanation about what we're intending in respect of applications to have material from other cases taken as evidence in this case. We've submitted one motion in respect of evidence about Brcko. We haven't yet listed all the similar material we may seek to adduce. The question of me was, by your staff, whether we were going to, as it were, drip feed it or present it comprehensively.

We've presented one at the moment really in order to see if this is acceptable to the Chamber. If it is, the very substantial exercise of gathering the other broadly similar material will then be undertaken rather than undertaken in advance lest it should be wasted, and we are entirely willing to either drip feed or to try and provide in comprehensive chunks or perhaps one single chunk even entirely as will be most helpful to the Chamber, although, of course, if such evidence is going to be admitted, some of it has yet even to be heard because it will be being heard in other cases that simply will pre-date us but not by unnecessarily very many weeks or months. So we'll do whatever is most helpful. That's the reason for having one and only one version at the moment.

JUDGE MAY: We'll consider the matter further. We'll adjourn now -- yes, provided you're not reverting to the old topic. What is it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I have to say that I demand that you give me all day on Monday for the cross-examination of this ⁴³⁰⁹ witness. And you cannot limit the -- by limiting the cross-examination save the witness. One of the witnesses you proclaimed ill, some other witnesses were proclaimed something else, but you can't send this witness back before I've finished cross-examining him. He's a relevant witness, and I must be -- am -- I am given the right to cross-examine him. And I demand at least the full -- the whole day on Monday.

JUDGE MAY: We've ruled. You've got until the break. Now, we'll adjourn now until 9.00 Monday morning.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.08 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 6th day of May,

2002, at 9.00 a.m.