Mishtic for ZPS: You're discrediting witness Basota, so there must be a permit.

“Justice Vow“.

This Misethic statement came when a statement by Rexhep Selim was presented discussing the shares he had organised KLA in 1997.

“Rexep Selimi says below: After those three, there were several other people who were brought by Hashim Thaci and Kadri Wessel to Jablanica. So seven hand plaguees were brought in by those two. We had 11 of them, we had three more which came in other forms and made 14 of them to prepare the 14 shares of the 11 1997 story. Until that day we have not used any of these mortars, although we needed to use them, in order for Serbia not to take action because at that time we calculated that this is a big weapon and wanted to catch Serbia unawares as we did by organising a very powerful and synchronized action in September 1997. We had 14 plagues and made 14 shares. If we had 20 pestilences we'd have done 20 shares” the prosecutor quoted Rexhep Selim's statement.

Later, the prosecutor turned to witness Basota, asking whether he was familiar with the synchronized shares in police stations or regions that are unwritten by Rexhep Selimi.

This is an interview that I can't judge anymore as to whether it's legal, right? Or he wanted me to present a better organization of that time, but I wasn't part of these attacks. The shares have happened as far as I know, but to be signaled and so much at once I don't remember”, Basota said.

The witness was later introduced to a communiqué asked if he knows him as a KLA.

The witness answered.

According to the prosecutor, the start of this communique said that on September 11th and 12th 1997, at the Central Staff's decision, the KLA's armed unit carried out a synchronized action in Operational Zone number 1. He said the communique shows that, according to them, the shares were conducted at a very high speed in several police stations.

After completing the quote, the prosecutor told the witness he said Rexhep Selimi had no chance of doing anything at the Central Staff in 1997.

Yes, according to my information that we haven't met at that time, we haven't often met with him”, Basota said.

Following the following question, the prosecutor was rejected by Thaci's defense, represented by lawyer Luka Misetic.

Now this is discrediting the witness from what is given in evidence because it's essential evidence.

Similarly, Selim's defense, represented by lawyer Geoffrey Roberts, had the same objection.

I also object that they are related questions. There is no evidence of Mr. Selimi in the Central Staff so far”, he said.

Halling said, however, that this issue can be handled in the face of protection against her questions.

We're asking the witness to comment on this. These are the topics that if you want to lay with you you can ask them during your questions”, he said.

After the prosecutor, Misetic again took the word, saying he wants to make procedural comments, adding that the prosecutor or discredits the witness and that permission must first be sought for his discreditment.

The way I understand it is that the prosecution is discrediting the witness regarding paragraph 5, but our position is that discreditation is specifically provided with rule 243. According to the interpretations given by this court, it belongs to a statement that constitutes a disrepute under the 243 rule. This is defined or stated more clearly that it is the precedent of this court that has established that it is a declaration given in the context of a criminal investigation. Our position is that first you should seek permission to discredit the witness according to rule 243 and second; you cannot use a similar material to discredit the witness, on the grounds what the jurol body has determined constituted the discreditation of a witness”, Misethic said.

As a result, chief judge Charles Smith III asked the prosecutor whether they intend to discredit the witness.

I'd say not yet, though in that direction we're going. At the moment we want to try to explore more about what the witness knows about this incident”, said the prosecutor, who the chief judge replied that he himself understood.

On the other hand, Misetic said one side could not seek to discredit a witness in case no authorization is required under a specific rule.

Our position is that when a party calls a witness and presents witness testimony and requires direct testimony from the witness, the side if not authorized by rule 243 cannot seek discreditation because it is thought that the witness speaks the truth as far as its content is concerned, Misethic said.

As a result, Misethic simply demanded that the Prosecution's position be made clear.

“We resist in this hypothetical part, but when we move on to the practical part we will make it clear”, the prosecutor said.

Before all this, the witness was asked who members of the Kosovo Liberation Army Central Staff were at the time the first shares were held.

The “in the Central Staff was Azem Syla, I, Xhavit Haliti, Nat Hasani, apparently also Ali Ahmeti”, he said, but his answer was not heard when asked if he was part of the facility, as well as Xhedin Gashi.

Later, the witness said his name as part of the Central Staff was nominated by Xhedin Gashi himself.

The “at the time was asked by Xhedin Gashi to be given three names within Kosovo and three names outside Kosovo for this Central Staff. He has sent my name and the name of Nat Hasan, and there we have learned that Azem Syla, Xhavit Haliti, and it seems Ali Ahmeti”.

It is noteworthy that his statements, Misestic and her answers were made in the courtroom without witness presence.

Sokol Basota: Azem Syla was KLA commander

(altering, 13:30) -- Witness Sokol Basota said today in The Hague that Azem Syla was commander of the Kosovo Liberation Army (UÇK).

This statement was made by Basota when prosecutor Matt Halling was asked what Azem Syla's role in the KLA was.

“Azem Syla had the role of KLA commander”, Sokol Basota said, reports “Justice Vow“.

The witness was later presented with an article published in September 1999 in the newspaper “Zri”, in which Azma Syla had declared that the KLA was created in 1993 and that meeting was him, Xhavit Haliti, Ali Ahmeti, another friend who had recently said I could not mention his name.

The organisational structure of guerrilla groups, the tactic of conducting shares, the way of adding lines, the securing of weapons and ammunition, the way of keeping the interconnection within them and the centred in Kosovo, preparing quarts with military knowledge, and the main decision to intensify shares throughout Kosovo”, Kosovo's Prosecutor quoted Azze Syla's statement.

In this regard, the witness said there has been a meeting in Tirana this same year, but it is not the creation of KLA.

And we met in Tirana, but that was created. The KLA is not discutu. Simply at this meeting, only instructions have been given that there are armed groups in Kosovo and that work to unite those groups, but that there is no discussion of the establishment of an army at that” meeting, Basota said.

The Witness said that he feels that this scripture in this newspaper is moreglifying than reflecting reality.

“This writing is moregloricator written than it seems to be true in it”, Basota said.

The prosecutor demanded that this document be accepted in evidence. The controversy, however, had the argument that the witness disputes the truth of that interview.

As a result, the chief judge said that they would accept only a few pages of the document rather than all of it on evidence.

Prior to that, the witness confirmed it was part of the Kosovo People's Movement (LPK) since 1982. He said he didn't know if the LPK took any military positions around 1993.

The witness was also asked whether from political work to military work within the LPK in 1993.

“in 1993 I did no military action and I did not take any combat action during that time-for 1993”, he said.

The Witness said that he was afraid that they would not be arrested. While the prosecutor asked him whether there was fear that there were people infiltrated by Serbia to the LKP.

“In illegal organizations there is never a way to infiltrate people who actually can cooperate with the invaders but that concrete cases do not know”, Basota said.

He also showed the preventative measures they took within the LPK to keep their secrets hidden.

“There were preventative measures to be organized into threes d.m. Three members in order to eliminate the entrances to these elements that would dense us in our organization. The triple formula was called at the time when I could have with two people behind me, a friend of mine followed me and someone else, and so it was that preventing me from coming up with information”, he said.

He was also asked whether there were concerns at the LKP that persons arrested by Serbia could extract information for other members of the Movement.

“Yes, it is possible that fear exists but I don't know that there are concrete cases that one of the people around here has done something like that”, Basota said.