1 Thursday, 16 May 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The witness entered court]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

6 JUDGE MAY: Before we begin, there are one or two administrative

7 matters. First of all, we have looked at the statement of Witness -- what

8 was Witness K28. We will admit that statement under Rule 92 bis, subject

9 to any submissions that are made about it.

10 The other matter is this: Mr. Milosevic, last night I mentioned

11 the witness statement, and I should explain the position to you so that

12 you understand it.

13 Normally the rule, the procedure is that the Judges do not have

14 the original witness statements of the witnesses when they give evidence

15 live, so we haven't got the statement of this witness at the moment. We

16 haven't seen it yet.

17 To explain matters further, we do have the statements if the

18 Prosecution submit the statements under Rule 92 bis, we have those, of

19 course. But for any witness who gives evidence live, we do not have the

20 witness statements unless they are formally exhibited in the case, in

21 which case we have them. And I think it's right that in virtually every

22 case so far, that has happened.

23 Now, if you want us to have this witness's statement, say so and

24 we will get a copy.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. You can certainly have

1 the statement.

2 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Can we have copies, please.

3 MR. NICE: Prepared and coming.

4 JUDGE MAY: Thank you.

5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be marked Prosecution

6 Exhibit 151.

7 JUDGE MAY:, Mr. Milosevic, would you bear in mind that both

8 question and answer have to be interpreted, so would you leave a gap after

9 the witness has given his answer.

10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. By all means. I'll take care

11 about that. I'll turn on the English interpretation.

12 But before I continue, Mr. May, you interrupted me yesterday when

13 I was quoting the statement of his party, Novo Demokratija, from

14 yesterday's newspapers, because you said that you were not interested in

15 comments made by journalists.

16 Now, since I have the official statement, the official press

17 release of Novo Demokratija, a faxed copy of it, it's on their writing

18 paper, you can see it, and we can also have it displayed on the overhead

19 projector, with a seal and a signature of a member of their leadership.

20 It is Mrs. Rebeka Srbinovic who signed this, who was authorised to sign

21 this. I'm going to quote only a few positions so that both you and the

22 public would know what this is all about. So this is Novo Demokratija

23 whose president is the current Minister of the Interior, that is to say my

24 opponent, not my friend. No associate of mine, it says.

25 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you can put any matters in it to the

1 witness for his comments. The statement of that party is not, at the

2 moment evidence, but you can put it to the witness for his comment.

3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm going to put it to the witness

4 right now, just a few quotes from there.

5 WITNESS: RATOMIR TANIC [Resumed]

6 [Witness answered through interpreter]

7 Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]

8 Q. [Interpretation] They claim that at these round-table discussions

9 and these activities, these debates related to Kosovo, the state

10 authorities took part in no way, nor the representatives of the state

11 security services both home and abroad. That is the first fact.

12 I'm going to present a few facts and then he can make a comment.

13 The second fact is related to Ratomir Tanic, a founder of WIDI

14 [phoen], of the reformists, and Vice-President of the Civil Alliance of

15 Serbia. It says here in this statement: "Who from that position became a

16 sympathiser of Novo Demokratija"

17 And then she speaks of these public activities, the organisation

18 of meetings, et cetera. "Outside these public activities, there were no

19 plans on the resolution of the Kosovo and Metohija problem, nor did

20 anybody -- nor was anybody authorised on behalf of Novo Demokratija to

21 make such plans with anybody, including the persons Mr. Tanic mentions,

22 such as Markovic, Dojcilo Maslovaric, Jovica Stanisic, Momcilo Perisic,

23 Mira Markovic, Slobodan Milosevic, and the representatives of diplomatic

24 missions in our country. No one in Novo Demokratija was aware of the

25 purported contacts that Tanic had with secret services home and abroad.

1 So this is his personal activity, and this has nothing to do with Mr.

2 Tanic's participation in certain international activities organised by

3 Novo Demokratija. Tanic testifies --"

4 JUDGE MAY: Just pause there. The witness must be given the

5 opportunity to answer what is being said.

6 Now, Mr. -- just a moment. Rather than -- so that the witness has

7 a fair opportunity to answer these allegations which are being made, he

8 must be allowed to do so. Therefore, if it's put in parts which he can

9 deal with, he should be able to answer. Now, let him answer that.

10 You've heard, Mr. Tanic, what's said, what's been said,

11 apparently, by this spokesman, spokeswoman. Have you any comments you

12 wish to make about it?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. May I start with my comments?

14 I'll try to be concise.

15 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, the claim that at

17 round-table discussions and at scientific meetings dedicated to resolving

18 the Kosovo problem, there was no participation by the authorities of the

19 Republic of Serbia and of the SDB. First and foremost, I never said that

20 the SDB took part in round-table discussions devoted to the problem of

21 Kosovo. However, I did say that the representatives of the ruling

22 coalition, of the three parties of the ruling coalition did take part.

23 I don't want to present any kind of general thesis, but I'm just

24 going to mention by way of proof a gathering that was organised in 1994

25 and 1995 - please don't take my word for it - so in the mid-'90s at any

1 rate. It was organised by the British Ambassador, Ivor Roberts, the

2 British Ambassador in Belgrade. And the ruling parties attended: The

3 SPS, the party of Mr. Milosevic was there, represented by Goran Percevic;

4 and from the JUL party, there was Mr. Vladimir Stambuk and Mrs. Jelica

5 Stambuk as representatives of JUL; Percevic as a representative of the

6 SPS; and then Tahir Hasanovic and I took part as representatives of Novo

7 Demokratija; then Fehmi Agani as a representative of the Albanians or,

8 rather, a representative of Rugova's party. There were also other members

9 from Albanian political life; Surroi, Vllasi, et cetera. And also the

10 representatives of the Diplomatic Corps from Belgrade or, rather, the

11 embassies of all countries of the Contact Group.

12 JUDGE MAY: You're being asked to slow down. You're going too

13 fast. And could you deal with it a little more concisely. We have that

14 point. Now, is there any other answer you want to make?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just mentioned the particular

16 gathering by way of proof, which shows that this claim is not correct.

17 The second assertion, that no one was aware of my contacts with

18 foreign intelligence services -- oh, I'm sorry.

19 The second claim, that no one was aware of my contacts with the

20 security services, first of all, it is quite normal that these contacts

21 are not advertised all over, so it is only natural that all members of the

22 party would not be aware of that. And secondly, I did not have any kind

23 of illegal contacts with any security service, either home or abroad,

24 foreign services or domestic services. As I already said, I had certain

25 contacts related to the intelligence dimension of legal political issues

1 like the Dayton Agreement, like the struggle against terrorism, like the

2 dialogue in Kosovo.

3 Such contacts Mr. Milosevic also had through his authorised

4 representatives, both with the CIA and other intelligence organisations.

5 For example, the head of the CIA, Mr. William Deutsche, paid a public

6 visit to our security service.

7 JUDGE MAY: I think we have the point.

8 Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

9 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. Yes. But this pertains to only part of it, this point made by Mr.

11 Mr. Tanic.

12 A. Well, please read on. There's no problem.

13 Q. Outside these public political frameworks, there were no plans on

14 resolving the Kosmet problem.

15 A. May I respond to this? I'm sorry.

16 JUDGE MAY: No. Let the question finish.

17 Yes. Go on, Mr. Milosevic.

18 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. "On behalf of Novo Demokratija, no one was authorised to make such

20 plans with anyone, including persons that Mr. Tanic mentions, Ratko

21 Markovic, Dojcilo Maslovaric, Jovica Stanisic, Momcilo Perisic, Mira

22 Markovic, Slobodan Milosevic, and the representatives of diplomatic

23 missions in our country."

24 A. This assertion is also incorrect. There is an official document

25 from the meeting of the Executive Committee and the Presidency of Novo

1 Demokratija on several occasions. I'm going to mention only one of them.

2 Before the meeting in New York, a platform was adopted by the Novo

3 Demokratija authorities, that is to say the Executive Committee and the

4 Presidency, and it is exactly the way I described it. That is one thing.

5 Second thing, I never said that any one of us was authorised to

6 make agreements with Mr. Jovica Stanisic, Perisic, Milosevic, or any other

7 persons in relation to Kosovo, rather, the Kosovo problem. I just said

8 that in three and a -- during three and a half years, there was a

9 negotiating process related to Kosovo, that I was one of the participants

10 in this process, that along with me there were other participants as well,

11 and that this political negotiating process was sufficient to prevent the

12 war, that Milosevic supported it, but in 1997 he --

13 JUDGE MAY: Very well. Yes.

14 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. There is no contest that there was this public participation, but

16 is it clear that this participation in round-table discussions and, as we

17 will see later, the participation in these other activities, like of the

18 Bertelsmann Foundation and these meetings of free intellectuals, as you

19 call them, were no negotiations. This was a presentation of use by free

20 intellectuals. Is that right or is that not right?

21 A. Round-table discussions were the presentation of use by free

22 intellectuals and politicians but I did not say these were only

23 round-table discussions. Apart from that, there were also clear

24 negotiations with a view to preparing an agreement on Kosovo, and

25 authorised representatives of all three parties in the ruling coalition

1 took part in this. I am prepared to present evidence with regard to this

2 and call additional witnesses.

3 Q. All right, but they claim the opposite, that there were no plans.

4 I quoted that already, and I don't want to mention it again because it's

5 already part of the transcript.

6 I'm quoting yet again their official paper. The third fact, that:

7 "The content of the testimony of Mr. Tanic testifies to his attempt to

8 construct a story in which Novo Demokratija did not take part in the way

9 he has depicted this, nor did he have such importance as is the one that

10 he wishes to have attached to himself. To the best of our knowledge,

11 Mr. Tanic least of all, least of all could have been a partner to

12 Mr. Milosevic in the building and conduct of some kind of plan for

13 restoring the autonomy to Kosovo and Metohija and resolving the crisis in

14 the province."

15 And then what I read to you yesterday: "Imagination does all

16 sorts of things and sometimes necessity even more than that."

17 JUDGE MAY: One moment.

18 Now, Mr. Tanic, you should have the opportunity to comment on that

19 passage which has been read to you if you wish to. It may be that you

20 don't.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Why not? Why would I not wish to?

22 There's nothing there which --

23 JUDGE MAY: Don't argue. Just answer. If you don't want to

24 comment, don't comment.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My answer is as follows: First of

1 all, I never claimed that I was a partner in the negotiations with Mr.

2 Milosevic but that he was included in the negotiations as well, and that

3 from time to time, linked to the topics of those negotiations, I had

4 contacts with his closest associates and with him in order to dovetail our

5 positions. I never said we were partners. Had we been partners, I would

6 probably be here as an accused before this Tribunal as well.

7 Now, as far as the statement that my party made, it says in the

8 second part of that statement that they did not know what I did. And in

9 the first part of the statement, they comment on my work, on what I did

10 do. That seems to me be illogical. And third, I would like to --

11 JUDGE MAY: That's a comment. Try not to comment on what's said.

12 Just answer, please. Is there anything more you want to say about this

13 point? You've made the point that you weren't a partner and you never

14 said you were. Yes.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say that perhaps the accused

16 would like to see the contents of two books which bears out the position

17 of Novo Demokratija very similar to the views I am putting forward here

18 today. Or perhaps he doesn't want to see those books. I am not

19 representing the Novo Demokratija party here either.

20 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. In continuation, the statement says the following: That is to say

23 apart from the public round-table meetings, he did not comment on what I

24 quoted a moment ago, that Novo Demokratija did not take part in the way it

25 did.

1 A. May I comment? May I comment? I forgot to comment.

2 Q. Well, I have something more to add. I can't waste time on this

3 because Mr. May is going to curtail my time anyway.

4 Now he goes on to say, does anybody -- "Whether anybody else

5 instrumentalised Mr. Tanic, we cannot know," and so on and so forth. Now,

6 I shall provide you with the entire contents of the statement. It is up

7 to the Tribunal to assess the credibility of Mr. Tanic's statement,

8 testimony, and Novo Demokratija does not wish this to turn into a circus

9 in which witnesses will be witnesses of newspaper articles and facts

10 published in the media. And so on and so forth. So this document has

11 been signed and stamped by the Novo Demokratija seal and person

12 responsible, so you can put this as an attachment to this brilliant

13 witness whom you have brought forth here, and I will continue with my

14 cross-examination.

15 JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. That is enough, Mr. Milosevic, with

16 that sort of comment. Quite unnecessary.

17 Now, since you've quoted from that document, you should hand it

18 over to the Prosecution. Let the Prosecution have a look at it.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I would also advise, although your

20 defence is entirely a matter for you, that you consider seriously calling

21 this spokesperson as a witness in your case, the spokesperson on behalf of

22 Novo Demokratija.

23 JUDGE MAY: Take the document. Give the document to the usher,

24 will you?

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm reading -- yes. Yes, please go

1 ahead, take it. You can take it. You can also take a better copy from

2 their website. There's no problem in that.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to respond to what

4 was laterally said, very briefly?

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have not asked a question yet.

6 JUDGE MAY: He can respond briefly, yes.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Outside that, the president of the

8 Novo Demokratija, Dusan Mihajlovic, with me or alone took part in some of

9 these meetings, and that can be proved very easily through witness

10 statements. I'm not thinking of the round-table meetings but outside

11 that. And I would like to tender two documents which show that I took

12 part in the formulation of the strategic policy of the Novo Demokratija,

13 if the Tribunal would like to have that.

14 [Trial Chamber confers]

15 JUDGE MAY: Yes. The Chamber would wish to exhibit that document,

16 Mr. Milosevic. I'm not sure if it went back to you. It may have done.

17 Yes. If you would hand it over, we'll get it translated and it can be

18 exhibited.

19 Yes. Let's move on.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours. May I be

21 allowed to ask a question in that regard?

22 JUDGE MAY: I don't know about ask a question. I think you were

23 prevented from making some comment that you wanted to. If you want to say

24 something about that document, you can.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't wish to comment on the

1 document because I want to respect your guidelines not to comment. I

2 should just like to ask the Trial Chamber that if this document is

3 tendered, that the new documents and archive documents be tendered as well

4 which confirm my role in the Novo Demokratija. I have some of them, but

5 there are many more documents in the archives of the party. And also to

6 have this person come in as a witness as well, because he challenges

7 completely and overrides completely what I said, my relevance. So these

8 documents from Novo Demokratija will confirm that I took part in

9 formulating the strategy of the Novo Demokratija with the president

10 himself, the president of the party.

11 JUDGE MAY: Well, that's no doubt a matter which can be dealt with

12 in re-examination.

13 Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

14 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Well, let's now move on to one of the main points of your

16 statement. First, let me remind you of what you said and then I'll go on

17 and ask you a question.

18 You claim that at a reception in July 1997, in JUL, that I said

19 that at Kosovo there were fewer than 1 million Albanians. Is that right?

20 A. No. I said that in anger you said you would show and demonstrate

21 that there were less than a million.

22 Q. All right. Well, in the statement it says it the way I said it.

23 A. It can't say it the way I said it because that's not what I

24 stated. I said that you said --

25 JUDGE MAY: Now, would you both remember --

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right. All right.

2 JUDGE MAY: -- to pause. If this matter is to continue, it is to

3 be done so that the interpreters can do their work properly.

4 Yes.

5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Very well. The point isn't what you seem to be insisting upon

7 now. I'm saying that you claim that in July 1997, in JUL, I said that

8 there were less than a million Albanians. Is that correct? In Kosovo and

9 Metohija, that is.

10 A. No. I didn't say that you claimed that there were fewer. I said

11 that you would demonstrate and show that there were fewer.

12 JUDGE MAY: What my note says is that you, Mr. Milosevic, replied

13 that he would show there were less than 1 million Albanians or 10 per

14 cent. Therefore, they would not have autonomy. That's what my note has.

15 If there's something in the statement you want to put to the

16 witness, Mr. Milosevic, you can, but that was his evidence.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We'll come to that.

18 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. But as you said less than 10 per cent a moment ago, did I say that

20 there were less than 10 per cent on that occasion? Is that what you're

21 saying too?

22 A. No, you didn't say that then. This came as an additional

23 explanation but you didn't say that then and I didn't say that in that

24 context. I just gave an explanation as to why below a million. You

25 weren't as precise and specific as that. Far be it.

1 Q. So you made this as your additional information, is that it?

2 A. No. I got this from my conversations with your associates and

3 also with some of your lower -- other statements. But let's move on to

4 the point, Mr. Milosevic.

5 Q. I am asking you; you are not questioning me.

6 Therefore, you, of course, claim that you heard this assertion

7 from other personages that you talked as well; is that right?

8 A. Yes. Some of that was in the internal communication of the

9 Serbian government and parliament, something along those lines. That was

10 very compatible with those statements.

11 Q. Ah, yes, right. Now we can move on. And for us to be able to

12 move on without any burdens, let's clarify this point. I heard about

13 those assessments and appraisals as well and I considered them to be

14 realistic because several hundred thousand Albanians were outside Kosovo,

15 living abroad, and it was no secret whatsoever -- do you remember that, at

16 least -- it was no secret whatsoever in talks held between various people

17 that in Kosovo there were fewer than a million Kosovo Albanians? So what?

18 A. May I answer, respond, and comment, or this -- or is this a

19 comment? May I have your instructions, please?

20 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I thank Mr. Milosevic for his

22 frankness. I never doubted it. And this is the first time that I saw --

23 hear that there was a general assessment that there were less than a

24 million of them, that is to say, an official assessment. This is

25 something that I've heard for the first time here today. Usually a figure

1 of 2 or 300.000 more than a million were quoted. It is correct that some

2 of them were abroad. It is correct that they had come over from Albania.

3 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Now, are you aware of the fact, for example, that this figure was

5 a subject of free comment, both with representatives of the American

6 delegation and foreign delegations and so on and so forth. This was

7 something that was openly commented on, because the question was

8 constantly being asked as to how many Albanians there actually were in

9 Kosovo and Metohija. Are you aware of that?

10 A. Yes, I know the question. It is a legitimate question because the

11 Albanians inflated their numbers up to 2 million. However, I do not know

12 that the official policy was such that it said there were a considerable

13 number less than a million or less than a million at any rate. That is

14 something that I have been informed of for the first time as to its being

15 official policy, so thank you for your honesty and frankness on that

16 point.

17 Q. Mr. Tanic, the assessment of a figure is not official -- of an

18 official position. It is just an assessment of figures, an evaluation of

19 figures. Politics is an activity with a purpose, and an estimation as to

20 how many people there are in this courtroom, for example, is just an

21 endeavour to establish a fact. But let's move on.

22 A. Well, I --

23 JUDGE MAY: No. Let us stop the argument and move on to a

24 question.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. And are you aware of the fact that several hundred thousand

2 Albanians at that time were outside Kosovo, living abroad?

3 A. Yes, I am aware of that. Some were -- left because of their

4 economic state and others because of repression.

5 Q. I'm not asking you of the reasons, I'm just asking whether you're

6 aware of that.

7 A. Yes, of course.

8 Q. So if you took that figure of persons who were abroad, would it be

9 so much less than a million, than that figure of a million, if you deduct

10 the number living abroad, in Kosovo at present?

11 A. Well, that would be very difficult. And anyway, those people

12 living abroad also have the right to vote. The fact that they are abroad

13 does not mean that they have left once and for all, for good and that they

14 would have nothing to do with Kosovo. But I'm not an advocate of Kosovo

15 Albanians. We're just dealing with discrepancies in figures and the

16 discrepancy is 2 to 300.000.

17 Q. Mr. Tanic, I'm not talking about our conversation because the two

18 of us never discussed -- never discussed anything, never had talks. I'm

19 asking you about the figures that you are presenting, that you are putting

20 forward and for which you claim --

21 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, the argument is pointless at this

22 stage. But what would help us is to know this: Are you saying that this

23 comment was never made by you?

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am saying, Mr. May, that I never

25 talked to Mr. Tanic, and I'm not asking -- I'm not answering the questions

1 here but Mr. Tanic is answering the questions.

2 Now, if you're interested in this assertion, this statement, it

3 is --

4 JUDGE MAY: We're not moving on. If you're saying that you didn't

5 have this conversation, then you should put it to the witness so he can

6 have the opportunity to answer and deal with it. Just a moment. Let the

7 witness deal with that assertion.

8 What Mr. Tanic has said is that Mr. Milosevic never spoke to you,

9 never spoke in your presence, never said anything about a million

10 Albanians in your presence. Is that true or not?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those are two assertions. First of

12 all, the assertion that we never spoke. That is incorrect and I can prove

13 otherwise, that we did talk, at least on several occasions. He said he

14 never spoke to me in his life. I say that we spoke several times, and I

15 can bring five to ten witnesses here whom I assume I would have the right

16 to bring in to bear that out.

17 Now, that second assertion that we didn't specifically speak about

18 that figure of under a million, that is also incorrect. But for that

19 second specific conversation, I cannot bring in five to ten witnesses to

20 confirm it as I can for the first assertion to bear out the fact that Mr.

21 Milosevic and I spoke at least on several occasions.

22 So both these assertions are incorrect and I propose that I bring

23 evidence to prove the first.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. As to the second assertion, all I'm doing is asking Mr. Tanic

1 whether he is aware of the fact that that subject, that topic, that is to

2 say how many Albanians there actually are in Kosovo, was an element which

3 was freely discussed. It was no secret at all.

4 That is the point of what I'm asking you. You didn't learn about

5 any -- learn any secret piece of information. People discussed the fact,

6 that is to say, how many Kosovo Albanians there actually were in Kosovo.

7 This is no discovery. It's not a discovery of any kind. This was freely

8 discussed with foreigners and with our own people. So it was a very

9 ordinary question that was put forward. Are you aware of that?

10 JUDGE MAY: The witness should have the chance to answer these

11 long questions, if they are questions.

12 What is being asserted is that this figure or these kind of

13 discussions were common at the time. Is that right, Mr. Tanic, or not?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Discussions as to the number of

15 Albanians were common, but discussions as to the fact that there were

16 under a million of them were not common.

17 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. All right. Let's make a small digression before we continue along

19 those lines. As you claim that I told you that at a reception in JUL in

20 1997, where were we standing when we were talking at that reception? Tell

21 me where we were standing, the two of us, or sitting, or whatever you

22 like. Where were we? Describe it.

23 A. Well, the JUL building is in Djura Djakovica Street. It is a

24 villa. There is a reception salon looking out onto the garden, onto the

25 yard. On the left-hand side, you go into a separate room which is where

1 Mr. Milosevic, as was his custom, would have dinner after or, rather,

2 towards the end of the reception with his close associates. I was not

3 among those. But we were standing somewhere there between the large salon

4 and the other room that was shut off with a curtain where Mr. Milosevic

5 and his close associates would be having dinner.

6 So that's where we were talking. We talked for a very brief time.

7 I didn't say it was a meeting, we just spoke briefly and then I talked to

8 Mr. Mirko Marjanovic and so on and so forth, that's it.

9 Q. Mr. Tanic, as receptions in JUL take place every day on the 23rd

10 of July, that means when the days are hottest in summer, and they were

11 held every year in absolutely the same manner, all those thousands of

12 people who attended, including the member -- numerous members of the

13 diplomatic corps, church officials, and so on and so forth will be able to

14 tell you that the receptions in JUL were held --

15 JUDGE MAY: You are asking questions, Mr. Milosevic.

16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I finish? Will be able to tell

17 you -- they will be able to tell you--

18 JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... a speech, and now

19 you're making a speech about what you claim the other -- the church

20 officials and others would say. You're here to ask questions. So just

21 ask a question.

22 No, Mr. Tanic, don't you join in.

23 Mr. Milosevic, ask a question. What is the question?

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Do you know, therefore, what I said, that thousands of people who

1 were invited to the reception, that receptions in JUL in July were held in

2 the garden? They were garden parties and not held in the building.

3 JUDGE MAY: What is being put is that the reception was in the

4 garden. Now, is that true or not?

5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Not only that party, all parties, no exception whatsoever. These

7 parties are held on the 23rd of July, and they were invariably garden

8 parties, not indoor parties.

9 A. Parties are held in the garden and the doors are open and of

10 course there were a great many guests and that's why the garden was open

11 and the building itself. Mr. Milosevic was a gracious host, he tried to

12 talk at least a bit to each and every guest. And as far as politics is

13 concerned, it depended on the subject involved, sometimes it was a

14 friendly conversation, sometimes not exactly. I'm surprised that such

15 general things related to Mr. Milosevic's work are something that he

16 denies now. So the parties were indoors and in the garden.

17 Q. So parties were in the garden. Now let's go back to our question.

18 In mid-July, that is to say at the time of that reception, you

19 know the dates very well and there is no contest about that, this was

20 after the signing of this agreement between Rugova and myself on the

21 subject of education at the time of the implementation of the Dayton

22 Agreement and when tensions were going down, was there an expectation

23 that things would start precisely as you had defined in your statement;

24 that is, the reintegration of Kosovo Albanians in the political life of

25 Serbia and Yugoslavia?

1 A. Yes. Absolutely. That was the objective.

2 Q. Yes. But I mean precisely in that atmosphere, in mid-1997, that

3 is. There was an expectation that was expressed that the process of

4 reintegrating Kosovo Albanians into the political life of Serbia and

5 Yugoslavia would come about. Isn't that right?

6 A. Yes. It was already in the spring of 1997, but yes, that's the

7 way it was. I agree.

8 Q. Right. Now, do you remember that precisely on that 23rd of July,

9 that is to say the day when this reception was held, in the evening, that

10 on that 23rd of July, 1997, in the morning, in the Assembly of Yugoslavia,

11 I took my oath and took over the office of President of Serbia, precisely

12 on that day? On the 23rd of July, 1997.

13 A. I really do not remember things -- I did not present things that

14 were not part of the Kosovo problem. You don't really have to remind

15 anyone of that oath. I don't know whether this is just a statement or a

16 question.

17 Q. The question is whether you remember that, on that day, I assumed

18 the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. On

19 that day, on the 23rd of July, 1997. This is, after all, a public piece

20 of information, and there is no denying that.

21 A. Yes.

22 JUDGE MAY: Now, don't go over old matters again.

23 Mr. Tanic, if you remember something, just say yes and no. We'll

24 get on more quickly without your commenting on it.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. Do you remember that a week before that, I had been elected. On

2 the 23rd of July I took over the office, and at a ceremonial meeting of

3 parliament, I took my oath of office, but I was elected a week before

4 that.

5 A. How could I not remember when you were elected on our joint list?

6 Q. All right. I'm just trying to put all the facts together, the

7 facts that I need with regard to these questions, this line of questioning

8 that I've been pursuing. Is it clear that on that day, my term as

9 President of Serbia ceased by virtue of the fact that I was elected

10 President of Yugoslavia and that, therefore, in line with the

11 constitution, it was compulsory to have early presidential elections in

12 Serbia; within two months' time, is that right?

13 A. Is this a topic that was included in statements or is this a

14 statement? I don't understand this. Mr. Milosevic seems to be telling me

15 about the constitution.

16 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Tanic, you're here as a witness, not to argue

17 points. This is not a meeting, this is a court hearing.

18 Now, if you can't answer the question, say you can't answer it.

19 Or if you don't understand it, say you don't understand.

20 Yes. What is the question, Mr. Milosevic?

21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Was it a generally-known fact, therefore, since I assumed the

23 office of President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that according

24 to the constitution, presidential elections had to be held in Serbia

25 within two months' time? Yes or no.

1 A. Yes. Yes, of course it was known.

2 Q. Very well. Now, do you know that precisely talks with regard to

3 the estimated number of Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija in that context

4 were quite topical precisely because of the expectation that this time

5 more Albanians would take part in the elections?

6 A. I cannot answer this question only with yes or no, because it

7 calls for a lengthier answer. If I give a yes or no answer, I can enter a

8 verbal trap that was set by Mr. Milosevic. So I kindly ask the Trial

9 Chamber for instructions.

10 Q. I think that the question is quite precise.

11 A. There were two questions.

12 Q. I said: Is it clear to you then, in view of the coming elections,

13 that it was possible that the discussion on the number of Albanians in

14 Kosovo was topical at that point because of the expectation that Albanians

15 would vote in the elections in larger numbers this time?

16 A. The number of Albanians was a topical issue, but the motive why it

17 was so topical is something that requires a lengthier explanation. I

18 kindly ask the Trial Chamber for instructions.

19 Q. Please. Only a short while ago, you confirmed that at that time,

20 that is to say, in the public, there was a generally-expressed expectation

21 that the process of reintegration of the Kosovo Albanians would start, the

22 reintegration, the political life of Kosovo and -- Serbia and Yugoslavia,

23 and I interrupted you there and you said yes.

24 A. Of course if an agreement is reached.

25 Q. So please, there was this general expectation, the

1 Milosevic-Rugova agreement had already been signed, the Dayton Peace

2 Accord was already being implemented, tensions were being eased, and in

3 these general expectations that a process of reintegrating the Albanians

4 would start in the political life and then the coming elections for

5 president in view of the fact that my term of office expired. So that had

6 to be held within two months' time. So is it logical to you, because you

7 said it yourself only a short while ago that you could have expected,

8 that there was this general expectation of the political reintegration of

9 Albanians, that forecasts were discussed and --

10 JUDGE MAY: I'm going to stop this. I'm going to stop this. It's

11 not a question. What you do, Mr. Milosevic, instead of asking questions,

12 you pile assertion upon assertion, and it makes the life of a witness very

13 difficult. He can't answer assertion after assertion.

14 Now, I don't know what the point of all this is. If there is a

15 point, let's get to it. And ask questions more shortly. If you do, we'll

16 get on more quickly and you won't be stopped.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, if you take things out of a

18 time context and a political context, they look different. And if you put

19 them in a time context and political context, then they are clear, and

20 then they are -- they can be explained. And I imagine that this is quite

21 clear to you as to an intellectual.

22 So the witness confirmed that at that time in mid 1997, there was

23 a general expectation that the process of reintegration of the Albanians

24 would start.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not confirm that --

1 JUDGE MAY: No. For a moment.

2 You've been over this. You are asking questions. You are not

3 engaging in an argument with this witness. Now, the way to put a question

4 is to put it shortly and go from point to point. That's the way to

5 conduct the examination, rather than a series of assertions, which is

6 quite impossible for the witness to answer.

7 Now, we've spent a very long time on this particular point, and I

8 still am not following what it is that you are putting to the witness.

9 Can you put a series of short questions? And it may be then we can move

10 on to a different topic.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Because of such an atmosphere, which I hope you understand the way

14 I explained it to you, was there an expectation that this time Albanians

15 would vote in the coming presidential elections in greater numbers?

16 A. We strove for that, that they do vote in the elections and on

17 condition that a political agreement was made, yes.

18 Q. And is it logical, then, that when elections are likely and,

19 according to the constitution, will take place within two months' time,

20 that there is a discussion on the number of Albanians that may vote in the

21 election so that this may be taken into account amongst various

22 calculations among persons who are interested in the outcome of these

23 elections, of course? Yes or no.

24 A. Because it was logical, that is why we discussed it. Of course.

25 But there was no agreement afterwards. That was the point of what I said.

1 I really do not understand how I'm supposed answer these questions, and

2 I run the risk of --

3 Q. All right. All right. Do you remember the statements made by

4 some of our officials that before the Albanians boycotted the elections,

5 inter alia because they didn't want it to become obvious that there were

6 less of them than they were actually declaring?

7 A. Sorry, but this is a comment.

8 Q. It's up to them to decide. A little knowledge is a dangerous

9 thing, Mr. Tanic.

10 A. But, yes, I cannot answer such equivocal questions. Please could

11 I be instructed on this matter.

12 JUDGE MAY: Slow down. Slow down for the interpreters. No. Wait

13 a moment.

14 The question was, that you were asked, Mr. Tanic, is this: Do you

15 remember statements made by officials that the Albanians boycotted the

16 elections because they didn't want it to become obvious that there were

17 less of them than they were actually declaring? Now, that was the

18 question. Can you answer that?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. There were such statements

20 made by Milosevic's associates.

21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Mr. Tanic, do you have an assessment of your own, since you are

23 involved in such things? How many Albanians from Albania are in Kosovo

24 right now, persons who are not citizens of Yugoslavia?

25 A. Mr. Milosevic, for two and a half years now I haven't been

1 involved in politics because we have emigrated, and I have no assessments

2 with regard to the political situation in Kosovo, and I'm not talking

3 about the present day.

4 Q. And do you know that, in Belgrade, the figure 200.000 to 300.000

5 persons is being mentioned as Albanians who have illegally entered Kosovo

6 from Albania?

7 JUDGE MAY: It's not matter for the witness, as he's told you.

8 It's not part of his evidence.

9 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. And do you know that only recently in Kosovo and Metohija

11 elections were held that were --

12 JUDGE MAY: No.

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. -- staged by --

15 JUDGE MAY: He's given an answer to this. He's outside politics

16 and the country. Anyway, it's irrelevant.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He could have read about it in the

18 newspaper that elections were held in Kosovo and Metohija. This is a fact

19 from the newspapers.

20 JUDGE MAY: Don't trouble to answer. Let's move on.

21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Well, then, I advise you, since elections were just held in Kosovo

23 and Metohija now, to have a look at this and see how many Albanians voted

24 in the elections.

25 JUDGE MAY: Let us move on, Mr. Milosevic.

1 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. All right. So we've clarified this: It was expected that

3 Albanians would vote in the elections in larger numbers.

4 A. If there is a political agreement.

5 JUDGE MAY: Don't go back over old matters. Now, if there's

6 repetition, you'll be stopped. Let us move on to another topic.

7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Please. Do you know that in Serbia, before elections, as a rule

9 there is no other subject that is discussed apart from elections?

10 A. Yes, of course.

11 Q. Is it clear to you, then, that at that reception that you've been

12 referring to and where discussions were held and where you could have

13 heard - of course, not from me because we never talked - you could have

14 heard how many Albanians there were and that there were less than 1

15 million of them, that all of this was within the context of the coming

16 elections? Isn't that clear to you at least now?

17 A. That's precisely what I said, that the number of Albanians was

18 discussed at that reception. It's not that I said that I tortured you in

19 order to disclose a secret.

20 Q. Mr. Tanic, do you remember, since you say that you followed all

21 events very closely, that in that same year, 1997, that is to say it's

22 about two months after that reception where you allegedly talked to me, so

23 do you remember that in that same year, in 1997, in October, a summit

24 meeting was held, a meeting of heads of state or government of

25 south-eastern Europe, in Crete?

1 A. Yes. Yes.

2 Q. Do you remember that it was devoted to regional integration and

3 cooperation?

4 A. Of course. Of course.

5 Q. Do you remember the major step that was made towards the

6 normalisation of relations between Yugoslavia and Albania when Fatos Nano,

7 the then-Prime Minister of Albania and I, before the TV cameras, said that

8 we are starting normalisation, the opening of borders, that we will

9 abolish visas, that we will develope trade and tourism, et cetera, et

10 cetera. Do you remember that? That was carried by all televisions.

11 A. It's not only that I remember that but I was one of the people who

12 commented on the development of relations between Yugoslavia and Albania

13 in your newspaper Politika.

14 Q. And do you remember, then, that Fatos Nano then stated that the

15 relations with Kosovo were an internal affair of Yugoslavia?

16 A. Yes, but who is denying that, Mr. Milosevic?

17 Q. The point I'm making to you is that throughout that year, until

18 the summit held in Crete, there was a general climate of optimism and also

19 a truly peaceful resolution of all questions in Kosovo and Metohija and in

20 the region, including our relations with Albania. Is that right or not?

21 A. That is precisely what I said, that there was a political climate

22 and that there was a political agreement that would make it possible to

23 avoid a war, and that is compatible with my claim.

24 Q. And now, if we place this in the context of time and the events

25 that took place, does it become clear how your conclusions are absurd,

1 that is to say that the number -- that the figure of Albanians was to do

2 with ethnic cleansing and not with the forthcoming process of their

3 reintegration into political life, the normalisation of relations and so

4 on and so forth?

5 A. No. That does not seem to me to be absurd because the question of

6 the number of Albanians was a subject that was discussed in both contexts

7 and everything was all right until 1998 and until you started with this

8 policy of conflict, engineering that, and that's what I say in my

9 statement.

10 Q. And are you aware of fact, Mr. Tanic, that this atmosphere of

11 understanding and trust, confidence and optimism that was expressed at the

12 summit on Crete was an alarm signal to the forces which wished to

13 destabilise Yugoslavia and incite terrorism in Kosovo? Is that clear to

14 you? Is that well-known to you as an expert?

15 A. I apologise, but this is a comment and it's not correct at all

16 what Mr. Milosevic just said. It's completely incorrect. I would have to

17 give a lengthy answer. But my answer in fact is that the assertion is

18 incorrect.

19 Q. So when we saw a breakthrough in the development of relations both

20 in south-eastern Europe and in the Albanian-Yugoslav relations and the

21 calming down of the situation after Dayton, you consider that the figures

22 that were discussed were discussed because of ethnic cleansing and not

23 precisely to further those relations and to bring about integration; is

24 that what you're saying?

25 A. No. That's not what I'm saying. I was just saying that it was

1 the former option of ethnic cleansing. Of course there were honest people

2 who discussed this in the context of elections. It is not true that

3 foreign powers incited terrorism, and I took part in this climate which

4 was improving, and I took part in this and that is why I know and that is

5 why I say that you upset it all in 1998.

6 JUDGE MAY: I'm going to stop -- I'm going to stop you because

7 there must be a pause between question and answer.

8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. So you know for sure, is that it, that the foreign services of the

10 foreign powers had no part to play in inciting, financing, organising,

11 training terrorism in Kosovo and Metohija; is that it? You say you know

12 that full well, do you?

13 A. The foreign powers offered you precisely the opposite, that under

14 conditions of a political agreement, they enable -- they would enable the

15 cutting down of terrorism, Albanian terrorism in Europe, and that is a

16 component part of my statement; and I'm thinking of the Contact Group

17 countries first and foremost in that regard.

18 Q. And they did that through you. That's right, isn't it?

19 A. Not only through me, I never said that, I just said that I was one

20 of the people who knew this.

21 Q. So who did they do this through? Through whom?

22 A. They said this to you directly and in political conversations with

23 your political associates, and I made up an official note about that. I

24 don't wish to raise my own importance, I just want to describe the

25 negative process in which I took part. You have an official note in the

1 archive of the State Security Service, and if there isn't, we'll call in

2 witnesses. You were offered assistance, in the case of a political

3 agreement, assistance to suppress Albanian terrorism. I never defended

4 Albanian terrorism, Mr. Milosevic, I just said that you were

5 overexaggerating the problems and exploiting them, to the detriment of

6 both the Serbs and the Albanians.

7 Q. All right. So now you have evolved. You have made a slight step

8 forward, because I asked you whether, under those conditions of a general

9 easing of tensions and normalising of relations, whether it was logical

10 for the figure to be discussed in regard to the elections and not with

11 respect to ethnic cleansing. You said yes in relation to --

12 JUDGE MAY: We are not going back to this question of the figure

13 and the million. We have spent over half an hour on it. It's quite

14 unnecessary to spend that length of time on the same point.

15 Now, move on to another one, Mr. Milosevic.

16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the point is precisely -- the

17 point is precisely, Mr. May, that in this false indictment --

18 JUDGE MAY: We've heard you make your points. Now, there's no

19 need to continually repeat them. Let's move on.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What I was saying was that it is the

21 point of this false indictment to accuse --

22 JUDGE MAY: No. If you want to continue this cross-examination,

23 you must continue it properly and ask some questions and on a new topic.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. All right.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. You were asked, I think by Judge Robinson it was, if I remember

2 correctly, but anyway, somebody did ask you, at any rate, where the

3 relevance was. What is the relevance of whether there were more than a

4 million or less than a million? And your answer was that it was because

5 whether they would be treated in a national minority or a constituent

6 people depended on this figure. Am I right in understanding you?

7 A. Yes. I said that the percentages had a great bearing on the

8 understanding and substance of autonomy.

9 Q. Now, do you know that one of the basic principles of the

10 protection of minority rights and generally the rights of minorities, that

11 they cannot be conditioned by the number of people that belong to a

12 national minority? Are you aware of that? Do you know that?

13 A. Well, they are international rules, but I'm not quite sure that

14 they were respected during your regime, Mr. Milosevic.

15 Q. All right. I should like to ask you not to waste time, our time

16 on your comments. You have made sufficient comment. Would you please

17 answer my questions.

18 Now, where is the status of the Albanians different - of whom

19 there are a million - from the status of the Hungarians, for example, or

20 the Bulgarians, or the Ruthenians, or the Slovaks or any other national

21 minority, not to enumerate all of them now, in Serbia? Where is the

22 difference? What was -- how was their status different?

23 A. If a minority numbers 100.000 or 200.000 people, it cannot have

24 the same status as people that number 1 million in a country of 7 million.

25 Otherwise, I'm not quite clear on your question because Kosovo already had

1 territorial autonomy, and I don't understand where the problem was with

2 this autonomy for Kosovo as you raised it, except for showing that the

3 Albanians were not the majority there.

4 Q. You've gone too far. The Albanians were undoubtedly the majority

5 population in Kosovo. Nobody ever questioned that. But you've gone too

6 far. I asked you where the difference in status was, and you said of

7 course there was a difference in status. Of course it's different if the

8 national minority numbers 100.000 and another that numbers 1 million; and

9 that is quite the reverse, it is quite the opposite. Are you aware that

10 that is quite opposite and contrary to the general principles and rights

11 of minorities? That they cannot be conditioned by their numbers and that

12 if somebody belongs to a national minority which has 1 million, that they

13 have greater rights than others who --

14 JUDGE MAY: The Trial Chamber is going to bring this part of the

15 cross-examination to a close. We have now spent much too long on this

16 particular point of numbers. We have exhausted the topic. If you want to

17 continue this cross-examination, you must go on to another area,

18 Mr. Milosevic. There are a great many areas in this witness's evidence,

19 and you know that your time is limited. You should move on to something

20 else now.

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, that's why I said that I would

22 need more time, because the witness explained --

23 JUDGE MAY: No. You're wasting time with this. Now, let us move

24 on to another area of his evidence.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I asked a question. I asked the

1 same question that one of you gentlemen posed, that is to say where the

2 relevance lies of --

3 JUDGE MAY: We've been over the point now several times. Now, let

4 us move on. We do not wish to hear anything more about numbers.

5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. And is it clear to you that in the evidence as to the negotiations

7 that the other side provided us with, that you have shown and demonstrated

8 precisely the opposite, the contrary, that we can't speak about any

9 negotiations here, and your party, that is something that your party

10 states in quite precise terms. The policy that you presented us with - I

11 don't want to waste time and read it all - but this scientific symposium,

12 it says, which has political implications was attended by you, et cetera,

13 et cetera, then Simic and the rest, a scientific symposium.

14 A. Which has political implications as well.

15 Q. Yes, political implications. Mr. Tanic, every scientific

16 symposium dealing with a political topic must have political

17 implications. That's quite clear to one and all, it's just very logical.

18 Now, in view of the fact that you have not completed your

19 schooling, how did you manage to take part in a scientific symposium?

20 What science do you delve in?

21 A. The question -- first of all, I didn't say that I have not

22 completed my schooling. You tested the level of my university training.

23 I said that it was a private question and that I didn't want to answer and

24 that was a rude question on your part. But I took part in a political

25 capacity and not a scientific capacity at the meeting. I never claimed

1 that I was a scientist or scientific worker, and that was my function

2 there. And it was published in the papers as well. I never represented

3 myself as being a scientist, Mr. Milosevic.

4 Q. Well, in this piece of evidence - it is an article in the

5 newspaper Politika - which says that this was a scientific symposium and,

6 in the title, it says, "A Scientific Symposium Held Recently in Munich."

7 That is the main title. And you represented that falsely as being

8 negotiations.

9 A. I should like to ask the Trial Chamber, please, I never

10 misrepresented this as negotiations. I put forward documents --

11 JUDGE MAY: That is correct. We have the exhibit in front of us.

12 Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Not that you represented this as being negotiations, not only

15 that, but you represented them to be as negotiations that you took part

16 in, following my own authorisation.

17 A. I represented this to be a component part of the negotiating

18 process. I always spoke of a process, the process was ongoing for three

19 years. It had several tens or dozens of component parts. Some of them

20 were in the form of symposiums, other ones were tete-a-tete negotiations.

21 It was a process, Mr. Milosevic.

22 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Tanic, one at a time.

23 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Now, this symposium in Munich, you considered that to be part of

25 the negotiating process; is that it? Yes or no.

1 A. Yes, it was one of the links of this negotiating process which

2 went on for three weeks [as interpreted]. It was a scientific

3 discussion.

4 Q. Well, if it was a negotiating process, that means that you

5 considered it to be negotiations, in fact.

6 A. I don't understand. Is that a statement or are you asking me a

7 question? I said clearly that it was part of the negotiating process

8 which had many parts and lasted for over three years.

9 Q. So you say that this scientific symposium was part of the

10 negotiating process. Is that what you're claiming?

11 A. Yes. In conformity with your desire to have NGO groups,

12 scientific institutions, professional institutions take part to discuss

13 the problem from various aspects and dimensions, and of course, your

14 instructions were adhered to both by domestic factors and foreign factors.

15 Q. You mean I gave instructions to go to Munich to have a scientific

16 symposium held there? Was that my instruction? Is that what you're

17 saying? Is that what you're claiming?

18 A. No, not specific instructions for Munich. What you called for was

19 that, instead of the state organs, we have preparations for the Kosovo

20 negotiations by non-governmental organisations, notable ones, so that we

21 could avoid having people say that a third party was being involved in

22 Yugoslavia's internal affairs. You expressed that desire not only in my

23 presence or Mr. Mihajlovic's presence, but you said that in front of

24 foreign ambassadors and we'll call them to testify here as witnesses.

25 Your wishes were respected.

1 Q. Please, please, my stance and positions can be read about in the

2 papers. You needn't seem to be discovering some common standpoints and

3 positions that I personally stated and were published in the press that

4 anybody could read in the papers or see on television. There's nothing to

5 prove there. Well, I doubt that they could all see it.

6 JUDGE MAY: Just one moment. Just one moment. Now, this is not

7 an argument. This is supposed to be a cross-examination from which we

8 will gain assistance. And at the moment, it seems to be an argument.

9 Mr. Milosevic, would you concentrate on asking questions shortly

10 and to the point, please.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I hope that the questions are

12 very concise and short, but I'll try and be briefer still.

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. You said that these joint recommendations on the Kosovo conflict,

15 that you participants compiled them, Bertelsmann and so on and so forth,

16 the scientific centre, et cetera, and that the Germans and the French

17 adopted those recommendations, that paper; is that right? Just yes or

18 no.

19 A. Well, you can't ask -- you can't answer all questions with a yes

20 or no so that I fall into your verbal trap. The activities of the NGO and

21 the Bertelsmann Foundation went on for two years, and yes, at the -- in

22 the end, the paper was adopted which expressed the spirit of what was

23 discussed, and later on, the substance of that document became an

24 initiative on the part of the German and French diplomacy and later on by

25 the European Union. Not word-for-word but the substance of the document,

1 that is to say, the step-by-step approach, the three-stage development, a

2 provisional political agreement, and so on and so forth. And that's why I

3 presented that document, to show the spirit and stand of European

4 diplomacy and contact groups.

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, could you explain to

6 Mr. Tanic that he would have to be concrete and brief in his answers and

7 that they must be answers in response to my questions.

8 JUDGE MAY: There was nothing wrong with that answer. Now, let's

9 move on.

10 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Therefore, the Germans and the French adopted the recommendations

12 which they ordered to have compiled themselves; is that it?

13 A. Not the Germans and the French but German and French diplomacy,

14 later the diplomacy of the European Union and not ones that they had

15 ordered themselves but negotiations with the Serbs, the Albanians and the

16 representatives of the international community all took part.

17 Q. And what about somebody in the name of the Serbian government?

18 Did they represent -- did they take part, people who represented official

19 Serb positions, or was that you? Did you ascribe that function to you

20 yourself?

21 A. In order to facilitate the work of the court, whether I ascribe

22 something to myself or not, let me leave that aside. But the Bertelsmann

23 Foundation worked in close cooperation with Monsignor Paglia and your

24 personal associates, Mr. Ratko Markovic and Mr. Dojcilo Maslovaric, had

25 contacts with them. Let us forget myself because I say that I can always

1 testify to circumstances that can be proved from two or three aspects.

2 Q. I asked you whether at these preparations that you say went on for

3 two years were participated in by any official representatives of Serbia?

4 A. Yes, of course.

5 Q. When did they take part?

6 A. I said, first and foremost, this was a process in which several

7 NGOs took part.

8 Q. I am asking you when. Don't make speeches to me that this was a

9 process, et cetera, et cetera. When?

10 A. Starting from the first meeting that was held, the one that was

11 organised by Ambassador Roberts in Belgrade.

12 Q. This was a reception of Mr. Roberts'?

13 A. No, no, no, it was a meeting at Sava Centre.

14 Q. Again a round-table discussion.

15 A. All right. It was a conference, it was called a round-table

16 conference, but why are we engaging in such a verbal traps again? Now

17 Mr. Milosevic is making me decide between two very unfavourable options; I

18 should either be impolite or --

19 JUDGE MAY: Don't comment. Don't comment. Mr. Tanic, if you feel

20 you can't answer the question, simply say, "I can't answer that," or

21 something of the sort.

22 Now, Mr. Milosevic, will you bear in mind that the interpreters

23 have to interpret this. So will you leave a gap after the answer before

24 you ask the next question.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I just stress that. I don't know whether the

1 accused and the witness appreciate the need for the pause. In the vast

2 majority of cases, we have a witness speaking in one language and the

3 examiner speaking in a different language so that, ordinarily, the pause

4 is there, but in a case where the witness and the examiner use the same

5 language, there is a tendency to overlap. In many instances, because you

6 are speaking the same language, you quite often even begin an answer

7 before the question is completed, and I can sense that the interpreters

8 are having a very, very difficult time with the interpretation of the

9 exchanges between the witness and the accused. So I must stress the

10 importance of a pause. Resist the temptation to rush into an answer.

11 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Do you know that in these joint recommendations, it says that the

13 Albanians should have the right to use their own language in the process

14 of education, et cetera, et cetera?

15 A. Yes, but I do not understand the point of the question.

16 Q. Is that what the joint recommendations say?

17 A. Most probably. This is a general matter. This was not the core

18 of these recommendations. The core was that there would be three stages

19 involved.

20 Q. Please answer my question. How can someone then who comes from

21 Serbia, who doesn't even have to represent the government, how can someone

22 write that when this was never denied and when, according to our laws, the

23 Albanian language was equal to the Serbian language in Kosovo? How can

24 that be recommended? How can I recommend it to you to shave your head

25 when you haven't shaved your head? How --

1 JUDGE MAY: What's the question?

2 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. How can I recommend something that is so obvious?

4 JUDGE MAY: Put a short question to the witness so he can

5 understand it.

6 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Since the recommendation is to use the Albanian language in Kosovo

8 and Metohija and the Albanian language is, was, and remained in use as the

9 official language in Kosovo, equal to the Serbian language, how can a

10 recommendation be made to achieve something that has already been

11 achieved?

12 JUDGE MAY: I'm not going to allow that question because it's

13 another speech.

14 Yes. The next question.

15 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. All right. This third document that you also presented and that

17 you claim is a joint effort, et cetera, et cetera, it's called "Exploring

18 Futures for Kosovo, Kosovo Albanians and Serbs in Dialogue, Project

19 Report." That's what I got, in this form.

20 I'm not going to quote anything from there. I don't want to waste

21 time. But half of the papers that are contained in this document -- four

22 papers, as a matter of fact, and there are four more, I didn't even look

23 at them. What the foreigners or -- well, anyway, there is one, "Kosovo

24 Republic in a New Confederation via Federalisation of Yugoslavia," Jasmin

25 Pulja [phoen]. That is one of the titles. "The Autonomy Statute of

1 Trentino South Tyrol, European Model for the Kosovo Crisis," Predrag Simic

2 [phoen]. "Draft Principles for the Sovereign State of the Republic of

3 Kosovo," Esad Simic [phoen]. "How to realise independence for Kosovo,"

4 Martin Brosis [phoen].

5 Is it clear that half of these papers call for the independence of

6 Kosovo and a Republic of Kosovo as an independent state?

7 A. One of the tasks of scientific gatherings is to look at different

8 contexts from the worst case scenario to the best case scenario in order

9 to avert further danger on the ground. That is why all options were

10 covered, that is to say from autonomy to the independence of Kosovo so

11 that it would be easier both for the Serb and the Albanian side and there

12 would be less problems on the ground. Nobody asked for anything there. I

13 describe the spirit of the process and I'm saying that there was a

14 political process, nothing else, and that it was favourable to Belgrade.

15 Q. Yes. A process in question there are seven or eight of you, and

16 then papers are presented on the independence of Kosovo and you believe

17 that that is a political process which resolves problems. Did I

18 understand you correctly?

19 A. No. No, you did not understand me correctly. I presented this

20 only as part of a total where my own paper's included and I say that this

21 was an authorised approach by the Serb side. You authorised it,

22 step-by-step in three stages, no independence whatsoever, but this is put

23 in a scientific way. And there were people there who wanted to test the

24 negative scenarios as well, precisely to help the authorities in Belgrade

25 in order to avoid this. It's not that somebody was looking for something.

1 I presented this only because of my own paper, because of my own platform,

2 because I don't have any other papers.

3 Q. Oh, this is the first time I hear that you have a platform of your

4 own.

5 A. No, I'm not saying it's a platform of my own, I just presented

6 this in order to show what I was defending.

7 JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... it's time for an

8 adjournment. We'll adjourn for 20 minutes.

9 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.

10 --- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.

11 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Now, a little while ago --

14 MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... I haven't objected

15 to any of the questions this morning because I have no doubt my objection

16 would have added to the difficulties the Court is encountering, but I

17 would urge that the Court consider abbreviating the cross-examination

18 unless it's going to become more useful, but that's matter entirely for

19 the Court.

20 If the Court is going to allow the accused to go beyond today, I

21 shan't be here on Tuesday, and I would invite the Court to require him to

22 deal with examination on any security issues today, simply because they

23 are matters about which I am much better informed than any others, and

24 they're not necessarily matters that are widely-known amongst our team.

25 So it would be preferable if he could deal with those today. Preferable,

1 so far as I'm concerned, that he should finish altogether today, but

2 that's a matter for the Chamber.

3 JUDGE MAY: When you say "security issues," these are the issues

4 concerned with what?

5 MR. NICE: Communication with intelligence agencies and matters of

6 that sort.

7 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Kay.

10 MR. KAY: I advised Mr. Nice during the break that there would be

11 one or two issues in relation to that matter that I would be touching upon

12 in questioning this particular witness which will go to issues of

13 credibility. It won't be extensive, but it would be of a limited form.

14 JUDGE MAY: Well, we shall have to decide what, if any, time the

15 accused should have on Tuesday morning.

16 Meanwhile, Mr. Milosevic, if you can deal with those issues.

17 You've heard what counsel has said and if you can deal with them, you

18 should today.

19 But we have a more general announcement to make because during the

20 adjournment, we have taken the opportunity of considering the conduct of

21 the cross-examination so far. We are of the view that far too much time

22 has been wasted in repetition and personal argument between the witness

23 and the accused.

24 From now on, we will expect that the accused avoids lengthy

25 speeches and repetition and keeps his questions short. Likewise, we shall

1 expect that the witness avoid personal argument and comments on and to the

2 accused and answers the questions as shortly as possible.

3 Mr. Milosevic, if you want to test the credibility of this

4 witness, you should do so now. There is much of his evidence which has

5 been left untested by your concentration and repetition of preliminary

6 matter. As you know, your time will be limited, so we suggest that you

7 move on to other topics. And if you want to cross-examine about the

8 statement, you should do so as soon as possible.

9 Yes.

10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I shall cross-examine in the

11 order that I have made for myself. I have it down here, and it follows

12 his own statement.

13 As for time, I assume that you are duty-bound to give me more time

14 than the Prosecutor had, in view of the written documents that he

15 provided. So I shall continue.

16 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. I quoted to you awhile ago the last one of these documents, and it

18 is obvious that half of the papers presented were about the independence

19 of Kosovo. Is what I read correct, that the historian Dusan Matkovic

20 which was the Ambassador of Yugoslavia in Greece today said, in March

21 1998, that he was, I quote, "surprised and appalled when Tanic, at the

22 talks between the Serb and Albanians intellectuals in Munich in the

23 organisation of the Bertelsmann Foundation concerning the problem of

24 Kosovo, quite coolly discussed the possibility of Kosovo becoming an

25 independent state." Just yes or no; is it correct?

1 A. This statement was denied, that is to say that it was given in the

2 wrong context.

3 Q. All right. You denied it. Let's go on. In your statement, on

4 page 9 - I'll go back to that - it's page 9 in the Serbian translation of

5 the statement, you said that in Kosovo, on the 25th of June, I made a

6 speech in which I annulled all the results of the negotiations which you

7 had held until then. I looked at that speech. I have it. So I'm going

8 to ask you the following: Why do you think that anything was said in a --

9 against the Albanians in that speech? I'm not talking about your results

10 because I first heard of your results over here. So Politika, the daily

11 newspaper, published all of this.

12 In this area, there should be a policy of national equality of

13 rights.

14 JUDGE MAY: This is precisely the point which I had in mind. How

15 can the witness follow this? What is the question?

16 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Please. Where is there anything here which jeopardises the rights

18 of Albanians? Because he claims that in my speech, I simply brought into

19 question those rights of theirs. So where does it say that here? I'm

20 quoting, and the newspapers are a kind of history. They cannot be

21 rewritten for the same dates. So it's the 25th.

22 JUDGE MAY: No need to give us any comment about the newspapers.

23 What is that -- you're asking about the speech, are you, of the 25th of

24 June, 1997, referred to in the witness's statement; is that right?

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Right.

1 JUDGE MAY: What is you're putting about that speech?

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I want him to answer the

3 following question: Where in my speech was there any reference to

4 anything that would jeopardise the rights of Albanians? So I'm quoting

5 this to him. "In this area there should be a policy of national equality

6 of rights, a spirit of tolerance should prevail. Everything that

7 characterises a humane, democratic society."

8 Now I'm going to skip a part, and then it says: "I believe that

9 now is the time for the forces who wish their country and their people

10 well, to unite in order to achieve the results that we wish to achieve in

11 terms of reforms and development, and I hope that in this way this town

12 and all of Kosovo and Metohija is going to give their contribution."

13 Then furthermore: "As for the work of state organs, they should

14 act in accordance with the law, notably in Kosovo, because the

15 possibilities for discrimination are greater than in other parts of the

16 republic, several times greater, at that. Our state has to be an example

17 in terms of the state authority --"

18 JUDGE MAY: It's impossible for the witness to answer if you read

19 out two or three minutes' worth of speech, as you've done. Just a moment.

20 Mr. Tanic, you're being asked about the speech of the 25th of

21 June, 1997, in Pristina, which the accused made, and he is claiming that

22 there was nothing in it to jeopardise the rights of the Albanians. Now,

23 can you help us about that? What is it that you say there was in the

24 speech which had that effect?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As you know, I did not mention that

1 speech in the statement and also when I testified. However, as far as I

2 can remember, in order to be as precise as possible --

3 JUDGE MAY: It's in your statement of the -- of 2000, and I have

4 read what it says in it, and it's that you're being asked about. If it's

5 wrong, just say it's wrong, but that's what it says.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, no. It's not wrong. It's

7 not inaccurate. It's just difficult for me to remember this precisely

8 without having the speech itself. As far as I can remember, in that

9 speech, Mr. Milosevic insisted on the following: That Kosovo be an

10 integral part of Serbia and that he -- and that actually foreign mediation

11 would not be accepted, as far as I can remember. I emphasise that. In

12 that context, there is a certain impediment in the negotiations. I

13 already said what was achieved in the negotiations, but there was foreign

14 mediation already in the schooling negotiations. However, the return to

15 autonomy meant broader autonomy within Serbia and Yugoslavia. So it would

16 be a part of Serbia but not an integral part of Serbia. I would like to

17 have a look at the speech in its entirety because people cannot simply

18 take things out of context this way. I would have to refresh my own

19 memory.

20 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. I have quoted what can be checked out, but we can't waste time. I

22 would just like to quote something else in order for it to be quite clear.

23 This is a totally untruthful assertion that is being made here.

24 JUDGE MAY: We can get a copy of the speech, no doubt.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You will get it. It's Politika of

1 the 26th of June.

2 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters find it impossible to follow

3 this debate.

4 JUDGE MAY: Will you listen to what the interpreters are saying.

5 They are finding it impossible at the moment.

6 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. I'm going to speak really slowly now. So in addition to what I've

8 quoted to you just now, in Prizren, I say particularly in this place and

9 in this town, I want to tell you something that I consider to be the most

10 important in this town, because in it, there are Serbs, Albanians,

11 Muslims, Turks, Roma, and others. Every one of the ethnic groups, to a

12 large proportion. That is why I believe that this town and this region

13 should be an example of carrying out the policy of national equality of

14 rights, a policy that would make it possible for all people to give -- to

15 live on a footing of equality and under humane conditions, that there

16 should be a high degree of mutual understanding and that a joint life of

17 all citizens should be built successfully.

18 JUDGE MAY: Now, Mr. Milosevic, which speech are you quoting from?

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's from the same newspaper. I

20 made a few speeches on that day in Pristina. I quoted a Pristina one at

21 first and then in Prizren. That's the other one.

22 JUDGE MAY: Very well.

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So all of it is in Kosovo and

24 Metohija.

25 JUDGE MAY: Let us stop there.

1 Mr. Tanic, do you remember now whether the accused made a speech

2 in Prizren that day, and what was in it? If you don't remember, just say

3 so.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not remember. I only referred

5 to the speech in Pristina. But I would like to see it on the monitor, if

6 possible, please.

7 JUDGE MAY: Very well. No, we're not going to go over it again.

8 You can produce a copy of it in due course, Mr. Milosevic, as part of your

9 case. The witness does not remember. So there's no point going on asking

10 him about it.

11 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. All right. Does he at least remember they were my generally-known

13 public political positions, and I'm sure that equality, et cetera, et

14 cetera, that this is the only key for life together in this town and in

15 this region, and I am sure the only key to the success of --

16 JUDGE MAY: No need to go on reading it. You can ask the witness

17 if he remembers that it was your - Mr. Milosevic's - publicly-known

18 position that he believed in or he supported equality.

19 Mr. Tanic, can you help us on that or not?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I remember that Mr. Milosevic

21 supported this in declarative form but not in his political steps. I

22 think there was a great deal of divergence between what he said and what

23 he did, and that was the essence of the problem and the political debate.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. All right. Let me move on since you're not going to allow me to

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank pages inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts. Pages 5085 to 5087.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 quote. This is a similar form of abuse as the 20 -- 89th of June [as

2 interpreted] speech, which was also abused and misused.

3 You said just now, Mr. Tanic, five minutes ago here and now,

4 referring to the speech, that you do not know everything I said but that I

5 insisted on the fact that Kosovo must be an integral part of Serbia,

6 should be an integral part of Serbia.

7 A. With the reservation made that I might have some lapses in memory.

8 Q. Yes. An integral part of Serbia. That was also a common position

9 of mine and I consider that today, that today Kosovo is an integral part

10 of Serbia.

11 A. That was not your view at the time at the negotiations. I

12 apologise for interrupting.

13 Q. Now, as you challenge that and you represent the Novo Demokratija,

14 are you aware of the fact that a document exists put out by the Novo

15 Demokratija party which you can take from their website yourself - the

16 date is the 19th of March, 1998 - in which, on page 1 of that document,

17 point 2, it is -- the following is stated: As an integral part of the

18 Republic of Serbia and, point 3, it says the relations between the

19 autonomous province as an integral part of the Republic of Serbia, and

20 then again, separate, individual, and collective rights of national

21 minorities cannot be realised contrary to the constitution and legal

22 provisions as well as internationally-recognised obligation of national

23 minorities to express loyalty to the state within which -- of which they

24 are part.

25 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness -- let the witness see the document if

1 you're going to put it to him. Show it to the witness, please.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will show it to the witness.

3 JUDGE MAY: Let him see it, and then you can ask a question about

4 it. Let him read it.

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I cannot spend too much time,

6 because you're going to subtract the time. I can give it to you and I can

7 give it to the witness as well.

8 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness see it if you're going to ask him some

9 questions about it.

10 Mr. Tanic, if you would just look at that document. Don't say

11 anything. Just read it briefly, and then it can be handed back to the

12 accused.

13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You can keep it. It's easy to get

14 another copy.

15 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Now my question is as follows: His party --

17 JUDGE MAY: Let him finish reading it.

18 Mr. Tanic, have you now had a chance of looking at that?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

20 JUDGE MAY: What's your question, Mr. Milosevic?

21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. As you said that I insisted upon the fact that Kosovo was an

23 integral part of Serbia, and I don't deny that because I do consider it to

24 be an integral part of Serbia - that is what I always considered; I

25 consider now and shall consider in the future - and as you're making that

1 comment from the standpoint of your party, is it clear from that document

2 by your party that your party too considers Kosovo to be an integral part

3 of Serbia and that therefore comments of your kind cannot have been

4 presented from the standpoint of your party as representing your party?

5 Is that correct or not?

6 A. No, it's not. May I quote a provision of the document?

7 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Page 5, it says: "Novo Demokratija

9 considers that the broad autonomy of Kosovo and Metohija within the

10 frameworks of the Republic of Serbia and Yugoslavia is the sole acceptable

11 solution which respects the interests of Albanians from Kosovo and

12 Metohija for the free expression of their own identity but the -- and the

13 interests of Serbia for having full sovereignty on the territory." So

14 broad competencies within the framework of Serbia and Yugoslavia. That

15 was the formula and that was what Mr. Milosevic applied in the

16 negotiations as well.

17 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Yes, but you read out "and sovereignty on the whole of the

19 territory." You've just quoted that, you've just read that out from that

20 particular document, which also confirms the integral part of Serbia.

21 A. No, Mr. Milosevic. This is a constitutional legal debate and we

22 need to call an expert here.

23 Q. We're not having a debate.

24 JUDGE MAY: I'm going to interrupt this. I said there was to be

25 no personal argument, and we meant it. Now, remember the interpreters

1 too.

2 Now, Mr. Milosevic, do you want us to have this document as an

3 exhibit?

4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It doesn't have any importance, but

5 you can include it in any way you like.

6 JUDGE MAY: Very well.

7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. You claim that you hadn't met my wife, had meetings with my wife.

9 JUDGE MAY: If the document can be brought back. Bring the

10 document back. Give it back to Mr. Milosevic.

11 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. I asked you, you claim that your met my wife. Yes or no.

13 A. Yes. But not as your wife but as the leader of the JUL party.

14 Q. Would you answer me with a yes or no, it will save time.

15 A. Well, this is an unfortunate term, "wife."

16 Q. Now, what is the name of the political party of my wife?

17 A. It is called the Yugoslav United Left.

18 Q. Do you know that that is not correct?

19 A. That is how it was represented on the electoral list.

20 Q. Not as the Yugoslav United Left but as the Yugoslav Left. The

21 name of the party is not the Yugoslav United Left. So you don't even know

22 the name of the party that you say you cooperated with.

23 JUDGE MAY: You make that assertion, and it's pointless to go on.

24 No doubt we can find out what the truth is. Now, let's move on.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. When was it founded?

2 A. I apologise. I'm not an expert in matters of your party. We were

3 coalition partners, I was not a member of JUL.

4 Q. Right. So you don't know, then say so. Say "I don't know." Now,

5 you claim you met me on the premises of the JUL party; right?

6 A. I meant the reception's head in JUL. It is the administrative

7 building of the JUL party, which is where the receptions were held. It is

8 used as a working premises and for official ceremonies.

9 Q. Well, we established that the receptions were in fact held in the

10 garden, but let's move on. You claim in your written statement that you

11 met me in the deputy's club secretly.

12 A. No. I didn't say that. I didn't say secretly. I think that you

13 were in the deputy's club on one occasion, but I threw out everything that

14 I was not able to corroborate with independent sources. So that needn't

15 be taken into account. I think we met each other once, but it wasn't in

16 secret. It wasn't clandestinely, I think, but I don't know.

17 Q. Right. As you're withdrawing that part of your statement, I'm not

18 going to pursue the point. Now, you're claiming that while I was

19 President of Serbia, you were in my cabinet, in my offices, and I'm going

20 to quote. It is on page 3, and you say the following, the third paragraph

21 from the top on page 3. You make mention there of the Presidency and the

22 Federal Assembly building or, "in his personal cabinet to the left of

23 entrance."

24 Do you know that my cabinet, my office, is not to the left of the

25 entrance? To the left of the entrance is the porter's premises, and then

1 there's the kitchen, there's the large banquet hall, and my cabinet isn't

2 there at all. The cabinet of the President of the Republic of Serbia is

3 on the first floor, at the end of the corridor, and it is the one but last

4 door. So it's not to the left of the entrance at all, which means that

5 you were never there. Is that right or not?

6 A. No, that's not right, Mr. Milosevic. I was there at least twice.

7 You keep sticking to this cabinet. You enter through the main entrance,

8 you pass the radar control section, like you do at an airport. As far as

9 I remember, you would go into the big hall on left where we have had

10 meetings, and there are at least two different photographs from two

11 different occasions. I thought that that was where your cabinet was as

12 well, because on one occasion you left the meeting for a brief period of

13 time and said you were going right next door to your cabinet. So those

14 were the official ceremonial halls of the Presidency of Serbia and there

15 are photographs.

16 Q. Please, it says here that you met me in my personal cabinet to the

17 left of the entrance, and now you're saying --

18 JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]...

19 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Very well. I'm just wondering how you managed to sell all this.

21 A. This is a very great insult. I cannot allow that even on pain of

22 seeming arrogant myself, that I sold anything to anyone.

23 Q. Well, this Tribunal is not a nursery, a kindergarten for me to be

24 able to sell something to it.

25 JUDGE MAY: Stop this personal argument. Mr. Milosevic, if you

1 want this to continue, you must stop, and that is an official warning,

2 that if you go on in this way, then the cross-examination will be brought

3 to a close.

4 Mr. Tanic, too. I've told you before. Resist the temptation to

5 personalise this.

6 Now, if you've got a proper question, Mr. Milosevic, ask it.

7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have many questions, Mr. May.

8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Since you make mention of my wife and the meetings you had with

10 her, tell me, please, what function she held in JUL in the JUL party

11 during the time you allege.

12 A. Mrs. Markovic was the president of the administration or

13 directorate of JUL, as far as Mr. Markovic told me, and it was a long

14 working meeting with the foreign representatives linked to the topic of

15 Kosovo.

16 Q. And what month was this in 1994? As you said that I called upon

17 the Novo Demokratija and you to the new coalition meeting?

18 A. Well, I'd have to refresh my memory on that score. Your proposal

19 was sent to the operation, the Civil Alliance of Serbia, the Novo

20 Demokratija. The Serb SPO and Civil Alliance had a different view from

21 the Novo Demokratija party. I didn't say that you invited Novo

22 Demokratija alone but that Novo Demokratija accepted your invitation that

23 you sent out to the opposition to form a coalition government to

24 strengthen the Dayton peace process. So please doesn't try to divert my

25 words, if you would.

1 Q. As in your statement, you use the term very frequently, "discreet

2 negotiations." You seem to use that term. Could you please explain to me

3 what you mean by "discreet negotiations"? What does the term "discreet

4 negotiations" denote? What does it mean?

5 A. Your express desire linked to the preparation for a political

6 agreement to Kosovo was that all this should be done in a discreet manner

7 so that if the outcome was not a positive one, that the three parties of

8 the coalition party should not lose face and so that the Albanian

9 secessionist movement should not gain the advantage, and that is why they

10 were discreet. Sometimes people knew about them, sometimes they didn't.

11 Some were very public, some were ultra-secret and confidential, sometimes

12 semi-secret, and it all took three years. The process was a

13 three-year-long process in which some ten other people took part in

14 addition to myself.

15 Q. So you consider that what your party published denying all that is

16 incorrect; right?

17 A. Well, it -- I -- what -- my party's statement is not correct, and

18 I said that we could be witnesses here to show that, demonstrate that.

19 Q. Who invited you, allegedly, to attend that first meeting, which,

20 as you claim, you had with me?

21 A. Well, the president of the Novo Demokratija party, Mr. Mihajlovic,

22 included me into the delegation which went to have a working meeting with

23 you to ascertain the joint platform on several topics. This was done at

24 least once a year and probably more often.

25 Q. Right. So Dusan Mihajlovic invited you.

1 A. He did not invite me, he made me a member of the delegation.

2 Q. Right. Now in the period that you're testifying to, did you hold

3 any state function whatsoever?

4 A. No, I never performed any official state function nor did I say I

5 did.

6 Q. I'm asking you. So just say no, and let's move on.

7 A. Not state but party.

8 Q. In that period of time - you're talking about 1994, 1995 - did you

9 -- were you in any way known as a public figure? Were you recognised as

10 a public figure?

11 A. Yes, of course.

12 Q. All right. Now, up until then, were you at the head of any

13 information institution?

14 A. Not up until then. Nor afterwards. I wasn't at the head of any

15 information institution. For a brief period of time, I was president of

16 the executive board of a monthly journal, but only for several months and

17 I didn't deal with any informational media work.

18 Q. Could you enumerate the results of your work to stabilise

19 relations with the leaders of the Kosovo Albanians.

20 A. My results thus far did not exist because I didn't work on that

21 question, especially not from the positions of an opposition party. All

22 we did was have a few friendly meetings, and a study was published, but

23 until then, there were no discreet talks, political dialogues,

24 negotiations or anything of that kind. So how can there be results on

25 something that did not in fact exist as yet at the time?

1 Q. How many contacts did you have of that nature up until 1994?

2 Personal contacts, the kind that you're mentioning now.

3 A. Well, at least ten. We're talking about the period that is not

4 incorporated into my statement at all.

5 Q. Very well. Since, until then, your party did not participate in

6 government, which state authority authorised you to participate in this

7 process?

8 A. I just said that I did not take part in any kind of negotiations.

9 There weren't any negotiations. I'm sorry. Please do not push me into

10 verbal traps yet again.

11 In addition to that, I had just joined Novo Demokratija a short

12 while before that. I did not take part in any negotiations in an

13 unauthorised manner. There weren't any negotiations in 1994. Contacts

14 are not negotiations. When they were, they were discreet negotiations and

15 there was a political dialogue and you authorised them for the parties

16 belonging to the ruling coalition and that is something that is a

17 well-known fact.

18 Q. You claim that you were the chief negotiator in the discreet

19 negotiations with the Albanians; is that right?

20 A. Did I claim that during my testimony? As far as I know, I did

21 not.

22 JUDGE MAY: He did not claim that. So you mustn't put things

23 which he didn't say.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. All right. All right. We'll get to that. Let me just have a

1 look at something. I'll find that. I can't find it right now, but this

2 does exist in the statement, in Mr. Tanic's statement, so we'll get to

3 that later.

4 Because you claimed that this role you got or deserved, first and

5 foremost, because you had good relations with the representatives of the

6 Kosovo Albanians; is that right or is that not right?

7 A. Yes, but personal contacts are one thing and negotiations are

8 another thing. And please restrict yourself to what my testimony

9 consisted of.

10 Q. All right. Not only with them but also with representatives of

11 the international community and also because, from a security point of

12 view, you were acceptable to the SDB. Did I understand you correctly in

13 response to my question?

14 A. As far as I understood the people that I was in contact with, that

15 is how you understood me. Having good personal contacts is not a

16 forbidden thing; right?

17 Q. I put my question very precisely. You say that you got this

18 mission because of your good contacts and relations with the Kosovo

19 Albanians, with the representatives of the international community, and

20 also the SDB.

21 A. I had good personal relations with the representatives of the

22 Kosovo Albanians, good personal relations with the representatives of the

23 international community, the service of the state security gave security

24 guarantees for me before I saw you. This is a formal administrative

25 matter, and please do not make me answer things I did not mention during

1 my testimony and not even in my statement. The statement was given --

2 JUDGE MAY: You will not -- you will not be required to answer

3 unfair questions, Mr. Tanic, but would you do your best shortly to answer

4 such questions as there are. The more quickly you answer the questions,

5 the sooner this will finish.

6 Mr. Milosevic, don't put things which he didn't say in his

7 evidence, and we'll get on more quickly.

8 Yes. Next question.

9 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. Did you say here, verbatim, that you were authorised for

11 negotiations with the Albanians first of all from Dusan Mihajlovic, the

12 head of your party, thirdly from the SDB -- thirdly from me, and secondly

13 from the SDB? Is that what you said here?

14 A. I said that I had authorisation from Mr. Dusan Mihajlovic and also

15 authorisation from you and from the State Security Service. These are two

16 different things, although they pertain to the same matter. I never

17 introduced myself as some agent of the state security, Mr. Milosevic.

18 Authorisation is one thing; guarantee is another thing.

19 Q. I do not see any difference between full powers and authorisation

20 except that one is a Serb word and the other is a word that is foreign,

21 that is used in the Serb language. So really --

22 JUDGE MAY: This is all a matter of argument and a matter of

23 comment. Now, what is the next question?

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. You said that also in 1999, you carried out the same activities on

1 behalf of the SDB with interests defined by the SDB. Is that right or is

2 that not right?

3 A. I'm sorry, but I have to be reminded as to whether I said that

4 during my testimony.

5 Q. Oh, yes, you did.

6 A. During my testimony?

7 Q. Yes, yes.

8 A. Well, there was authorisation to seek a solution to bring the war

9 with NATO to an end as soon as possible, but again we're talking about an

10 authorisation.

11 Q. You said that everything --

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, sorry to interrupt you. I want to

13 go back to the answer given by the witness where he said he had

14 authorisation from Mr. Dusan Mihajlovic and also authorisation from you.

15 That's from you, Mr. Milosevic. I'd like to ask the witness: How did you

16 get the authorisation from Mr. Milosevic? In what form?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Orally, during that first meeting

18 that I mentioned, the meeting between our delegation and Mr. Milosevic in

19 -- at the premises of the Presidency of Serbia. This was a working

20 meeting and we presented our project of resolving the Kosovo problem to

21 Mr. Milosevic in three stages that I already mentioned, three stages,

22 first confidence building measures and then political engagement, Mr.

23 Milosevic looked at that.

24 JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues]... authorisation

25 from him in the presence of others?

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Mr. Mihajlovic was present and

2 the other members of the delegation. Mr. Milosevic said explicitly, "That

3 is all right, you can continue along those lines." This is clear

4 authorisation. He did not put any objections to persons or --

5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. All right. So that was at a meeting with the delegation of Novo

7 Demokratija. Did I understand you correctly?

8 A. Yes. Yes.

9 Q. This is what it says on page 3, at the very beginning of your

10 written statement. "As a member of Novo Demokratija --"

11 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness have a copy of his statement. If he

12 has one in front of him; if not, in the original if it is in the original.

13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Well, doesn't the witness know what he was saying? What does he

15 need a copy of the statement for?

16 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, the -- he's entitled to have a copy of

17 a statement which you're going to ask him questions on which is no less

18 than 41 pages long. He's perfectly entitled to have a copy of that. Now,

19 it's -- it's page --

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

21 JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... is that right?

22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Page 3, at the very beginning, it

23 says: "As a member of Novo Demokratija and special advisor to Dusan

24 Mihajlovic, the president of ND --" that is to say Novo Demokratija -- "on

25 international relations in Kosovo." So he was involved in international

1 relations and Kosovo. "I was chosen to conduct these discreet

2 negotiations with the Kosovo Albanians. I received this authorisation

3 directly from Milosevic at a meeting that I and Dusan Mihajlovic held with

4 him in approximately 1995."

5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Is that what it says?

7 A. First and foremost, I still haven't received a copy of the

8 statement. I beg your pardon.

9 JUDGE MAY: He must have one in his own language.

10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, you can confirm to him that I

11 rightly quoted what I said in terms of his statement, because you have his

12 statement in front of you. And let me proceed.

13 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice -- Mr. Nice, have we got a copy of this?

14 MR. NICE: We'll get one in his own language. He does actually

15 speak and read English to a reasonably high level or a high level. Here

16 it comes, I think.

17 JUDGE MAY: Very well.

18 Mr. Tanic, you're being asked about the top of page 2 in the

19 English, beginning: "As a member of the ND party and special advisor to

20 Dusan Mihajlovic..." If you have that passage.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. I've found it.

22 JUDGE MAY: Yes. What's the question now, Mr. Milosevic?

23 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. My question pertains to the previous answer given by Mr. Tanic,

25 that I authorised him at the meeting held with the delegation of Novo

1 Demokratija that I had received. He described the composition of the

2 delegation and where various issues were mentioned. And in the statement,

3 he said that I authorised him at a meeting that he and Dusan Mihajlovic

4 had with me.

5 So when were you telling the truth; a short while ago or when you

6 made this statement?

7 A. The question is very unfair. I said the truth on both occasions.

8 I'm not duty-bound to mention all the participants in the meeting. After

9 all, the statement was made in its working version and what is truly valid

10 is what I said when giving evidence here. So it's really unfair. After

11 all, I could not deal with this for three years had I not had this

12 authorisation.

13 JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... just make sure

14 that the transcript contains my comment, which it doesn't.

15 Mr. Tanic, if a question is unfair, we will stop it. Now, the

16 witness, the accused, rather, is entitled to put to you things which are

17 in your statement. What he's not entitled to do is to misrepresent what

18 you said in evidence.

19 Yes. What's the next question, Mr. Milosevic?

20 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. A short while ago, you said that you had never stated that you

22 were the chief negotiator.

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And you, Mr. May, also said that the

24 witness never stated that he was the chief negotiator.

25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

1 Q. That's why I ask you --

2 JUDGE MAY: In his evidence, he did not say that.

3 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. All right. That's why I'm asking you to look at line 1 of the

5 next paragraph on the same page, where it says: "I was the principal

6 negotiator in these discreet negotiations." Full stop. Is that what is

7 written down here or not? "I was the principal negotiator in these

8 discreet negotiations." Full stop, that's the whole sentence. Didn't the

9 witness a minute ago say that he --

10 JUDGE MAY: Let the witness answer.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, the description while

12 I was giving this written statement, which was of a working nature, is not

13 the same thing as giving evidence in court. I gave a broader context so

14 the Prosecution could understand the context involved. In that context, I

15 was one of the driving forces of these negotiations because the president

16 of my party and I advocated these negotiations with the Albanians the most

17 and because I was the person who prepared the largest quantity of useful

18 documents, and I dealt with this with two or three different sides and it

19 is in that context that I used this.

20 And secondly, if we are going to talk about the English language,

21 principal negotiator, main negotiator, whatever, I already said that these

22 were political negotiations. This is a working version. Everything that

23 belongs to this working version and that is taken out of context is quite

24 unfair, all such questions.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: So, Mr. Tanic, what you're really saying is that

1 what you were one of the driving forces in the negotiations, not the

2 principal negotiator.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right, from a formal and

4 legal point of view, I was not a negotiator. That is not even in the

5 written statement. It doesn't say in legal and formal terms. I was in

6 the discreet negotiations.

7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. And do you believe when I quote your statement verbatim, without

10 any comment, where it says, "I was the principal negotiator in these

11 discreet negotiations --"

12 JUDGE MAY: You've made the point. The witness has answered.

13 Now, let's move on. You can comment to us in due course but not now.

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]