Now, Mr Witness, just so you can orientate yourself, I'm going to start in the year 1990 and then try and proceed in a chronological order, okay?

That's correct.

So you gave evidence on Monday about when the war came to Liberia and you explained that you were in Monrovia with your father, your younger brother and your four cousins, correct?

That's correct.

And you explained that at that time Monrovia was attacked by NPFL forces led by Prince Johnson.

That's correct.

And you explained how yourself, your father, your brother and your four cousins left Monrovia for Sierra Leone.

That's right.

Now, something you said on Monday, and I'll provide the reference, but there's perhaps no need to go to it and it was the 7 June transcript at page 42179. You said this:

"My ethnic background has Mandingo connection, a Mende connection, and initially the fighting started in Liberia. They were looking for Mandingos and Krahns."

Can you help me with this: Who was looking for Mandingos and Krahns?

Initially when the war started in Liberia, as I told you, I was in Monrovia and when the breakaway faction of the NPFL then, the INPFL, led by Prince Johnson, entered Monrovia, the Gios specifically and the Manos were looking for the Krahns and Mandingos.

And why were they looking for them?

Well, I cannot tell you the grief between these two tribes, but the Gios and the Manos were - because at that time the Krahns were in power and then I believe the then government in power, the late Samuel Kanyon Doe, has already given a lot of facilities and citizenship to the Mandingos, which I believe never went down very well with the other tribes. So they were seeing them as people supporting the Doe regime at that time.

And when you said they were looking for them, what did you mean exactly?

Say again.

When you said they were looking for them, looking for Mandingos and Krahns, what did you mean by "looking for them"?

Well, you know in Africa we have a lot of tribes, so whenever there is problem between one or two and the other two are aggrieved, then there is always that tendency of malice. So that existed even before the invasion. So as I've said earlier, the Mano and the Gio were purely looking for the Mandingos and the Krahn.

And what were they doing when they found the Mandingos and the Krahn?

Well, only God decides. If you are lucky, you'll be saved. If not, you'll be killed.

And when you say you would be killed, who would kill who? Do you mean that the Mandingos and the Krahns would be killed and that the Gios and the Mano would be killed?

No, the Mandingo and the Krahns at that time initially.

Now, you said when you were travelling to Sierra Leone that you had to travel on foot and that you couldn't travel by vehicles. Do you remember saying that?

That's correct.

Could you just tell me why it wasn't possible to travel by vehicles at that time?

There was no vehicular transportation for any civilian at that time. Anybody you see in a vehicle was either a member of the INPFL that was controlling all the way to Iron Gate in Monrovia, then when you exit going towards Ricks Institute you meet the INPFL. If you see anybody in the vehicle, it means they are combatant, or you have close relation who was also a combatant. But there was no vehicle available for any civilian that was travelling on that route.

When you say they were controlling all the way to Iron Gate, what do you mean?

The war in Liberia was factionalised. The INPFL that took the area that we were dwelling in was called the INPFL, which was a breakaway faction of the then NPFL, which was led by Prince Johnson.

It's okay. You can carry on with your answer.

And as such, he had a territory that he was controlling. He was controlling from the Waterside Bridge all the way to Iron Gate. That was where his defensive line was drawn. So when you cross from that territory and you move all the way to around Ricks Institute, then you will meet the NPFL. That was the borderline.

Now, you explained your routes from Monrovia to Sierra Leone and you mentioned a place called Gbar.

Gbar.

And I'm just going to ask that the transcript where you mentioned that be pulled up and it's the transcript of 7 June 2010 and it's at page 42180, please.

If it assists, the beginning this reference to Gbar actually starts on the previous page, if it needs to be put in context, but it's entirely for my learned friend. But if anyone is looking at it, that's where it starts.

I think the witness has acknowledged that he went to Gbar en route to Sierra Leone, so unless your Honours want me to go into that, I won't.

Ms Howarth, you are conducting your cross-examination. You are free to do what you want.

I'm grateful:

So if we could just go down to line 13, please. It says there - you were asked just about a commander called Gbar Ray. Do you recall that?

That's correct.

And the question at line 13 is:

"Q. So he was the commander there and you were saying it

was difficult to pierce the town because of him, yes?

A. Before we entered that town we saw a few dead bodies on

the road and so anybody at that time will fear. So we have

to keep on hiding in the bushes, get out until eventually

that day he was not in Gbar, he left to Madina, so the

commandos asked us to cross, so we have to survive that."

Now, I wanted to ask you, you said you saw a few dead bodies on the road. Do you know if those bodies belonged to civilians or to combatants?

Well, specifically I will not clarify that to you because during that exodus you have ambush vehicles out on the roads and you would see dead bodies closer to those vehicles. You can't tell whether these vehicles in the ambush - whether they were military personnels or civilians. All I can tell you is that there were dead bodies right on the road when we passed towards Gbar. But I cannot tell you whether they were civilians or military personnels. I cannot confirm that.

You mentioned the commander called Gbar Ray. To which faction did he belong?

Well, Gbar was controlled - the town itself at that time was controlled by the NPFL.

So did Gbar Ray belong to the NPFL?

Yeah, if NPFL was controlling Gbar then he belongs to NPFL.

And he was a commander, correct?

That's correct.

Ms Howarth, just before you go on, I'm curious to know why the witness could not tell the difference between civilians and military personnel. Mr Witness, bodies lying on the road, why couldn't you tell the difference between civilians and military personnel?

There was a reason. There was certain times when people ambush like military vehicles and the fighters never had uniform, they would just undress the military personnel and then use the uniform. So if you see such body on the road you cannot identify whether this person is a military person or a civilian. So that's the reason why I don't want to be specific.

So the bodies you saw, were they naked or did they - what sort of clothing did they have on?

Well, the two were men, they were having only briefs on. Then the last one was a woman and she was having just her - almost half naked herself.

If the people had have been civilians would their clothing have been stripped from them?

Say again.

You said all they had on was briefs. Is that correct?

That's correct.

Well, if the bodies were civilian bodies what would be the point of stripping their bodies of clothing?

Well, I don't think I have answer for that because, as I told you, we are moving under severe threat now with fear and all those things, so with other things in your mind you cannot just go and say I will start watching dead bodies to know whether this is a civilian or these are military persons. So I didn't have any interest for that. My interest was to safeguard myself to Sierra Leone. That was the motive of me being at that point.

The two men and one woman --

Ms Howarth, before you proceed. I note that the record, which I'm sure will be connected, says "you can tell" where it should say "you cannot tell".

You've mentioned the corpses I think that you saw of two men and one woman, correct?

That's correct.

Are you able to tell us how old those two men and one woman were?

Their age?

Yes, estimate. Were they very young people, were they children, were they older people?

They were young.

When you say young, do you mean they were young adults or they were children?

Young adults.

When you say a young adult, for you how old does that mean?

The people that I saw were between the age of 20 to the early 30s.

In your original answer, I'm going to go back to it, you said, "So we have to keep on hiding in the bushes, get out until eventually that day he was not in Gbar", and there you are referring to Gbar Ray. So you were hiding in the bushes because Gbar Ray was in that town, weren't you?

That's correct.

And the reason you were hiding is because you were in fear for your own safety?

That's one.

And isn't that because from the statement that you gave us - because you were in fear because you'd heard about - you had seen these dead bodies and presumably you had also heard about dead bodies and killings by this Gbar Ray as well. Is that fair to say?

That's correct.

So you were a civilian at this time, correct?

That's correct.

And you were frightened to go through this town of Gbar because you had heard about the reputation of Gbar Ray and you were fearful for your life. Is that fair to say?

That's correct.

Can you tell me in addition to the corpses that you saw personally, had you heard any other rumours about what had happened at the town of Gbar?

Can you simplify that question for me?

Yes, I can. You said that you personally had seen these corpses and that caused you to fear. In addition to seeing those corpses, did you hear anything else about killings in Gbar that caused you to fear?

Well, fairly enough, what I heard only in Gbar was that - because Gbar is a rubber manifested area with a very long rubber plantation. We heard there was fierce fighting between the government forces and the NPFL at that location and as such you could even - manifestation was seen by the bullets on the walls and the sticks that were around. So that was only the other - the only thing that we were told, that there was fierce fighting at that location.

Going back again to what you originally said, you said you stayed in the bushes until eventually that day he was not in Gbar and the commandos asked us to cross so that you could survive that. So you were waiting specifically for that commander Gbar Ray to have left the area so it would be safe for you to pass?

That's correct.

Now, one final point about your journey from Monrovia into Sierra Leone. Whilst you were passing through Liberia were there any checkpoints that you passed or avoided?

The only checkpoint that we had problem with was that checkpoint at Gbar, but there was checkpoint at Madina, Sanganama, Singe, Tiene, all the way to the border. And we are treated fairly. When you get to the checkpoint they will ask you for your personal belongings. If you have, you are searched. If it's after 6 o'clock they will tell you don't proceed because of the night. You wait. When it is clear in the morning then you proceed. So it was only at this particular checkpoint that we heard that we saw this kind of activities, but all the way going now it was a little bit peaceful.

Okay. So I'm going to move on now to when you get to Bo in Sierra Leone. When the war comes to Sierra Leone you're in Bo, correct?

That's correct.

And when the war comes in March 1991 it doesn't immediately reach you in Bo?

That's correct.

And first of all it's - it reaches other villages. In the transcript reference here, and perhaps again it's not necessary to pull it up, but it's 7 June 2010, page 42182 at line 21. You gave the following answer. You said:

"Because as the war was pushing closer to bigger towns in Sierra Leone, say Bo, Kenema, Bo is the second city of Sierra Leone, then there was these rumours that rebels were burning down villages and Liberians were involved, so anybody that has Liberian connection was a threat."

My question about that is what were the rumours that you had heard about rebels burning down villages? Can you explain that, please?

As you rightly said, and I said it was rumours, I was not on that side so specifically I cannot tell you the kind of destruction they were doing. As I've earlier said, it was rumour, and that was rumour. So it was not something that I could clarify to you because I was in Bo while things were taking place in Pujehun.

Mr Witness, I realise that you've come here on the side of the Defence but some of the questions that I'm asking, you are also here to assist the Court. Now I've asked you about rumours and I'm asking you what rumours you heard, so could you please explain what rumours you heard?

The rumours we heard was that there was fighting between the government forces and then the rebels initially entered from that axis Pujehun and at a certain point they were burning down towns and villages. That's the rumour that we heard when we were in Bo.

And what towns and villages did you hear that they had burnt down?

Well, those were very smaller settlements in the Pujehun District like Malema Junction which is the main junction to Gendema, it's 7 miles. We heard that village, it was burned down. And then there was another small town up to on the Pujehun Highway called I think Jioma Jagor. Yes, Jioma Jagor. That town was also attacked and burned. But these are very small settlements.

We may have to have some spellings of some of these names. I don't think we've had that last location on the record before. I don't recall that we've had it before.

Are you able to spell that at all?

I don't want to be giving wrong spellings to this Court, so.

Perhaps that's something we can look into.

Can you say it slowly, please.

Jioma Jagor.

I've been passed a spelling which is J-O-M-A-G-A-G-O. However, I believe that's a phonetic spelling. May I proceed for the moment? I'm grateful:

Now, Mr Witness, you've spoken about these rumours. From who did you hear these rumours?

From civilians that were fleeing from those areas.

And what did they say when they came?

A lot of them told us that people that usually leave their own towns to their own town because as long as this exodus was moving, people see their friends, colleagues with their loads, they don't wait for any attack, they will just move. So according to those that were meeting them, they were telling them there was fighting and whenever there was fierce fighting and the rebels have open hand, then they will just overrun the town, then if possible it's a small settlement and they have lost manpower in that area they will just burn that small settlement down and move forward.

And were these people in fear?

Of course.

And who did they say was responsible for burning their villages?

They said the rebels.

You also explained that at this time because you were a Liberian and there had been - the rumours had said that there were Liberians involved, that there was some threat to you as a Liberian person. Is that right?

That's correct.

And you explained that you had an ID card and that it was important to be able to identify yourself as a Liberian. Is that right?

That's correct.

Now, I just wanted to ask you this: When you said at that time you had an ID card, what sort of card did you have?

We are given a small ID card with the United Nation emblem on it. That was a card that we used for ration. That was the ID card that was used. Your name would be on it, and when it was time for ration, you showed that card, they will check through the list, and if your name is found, then they will supply you. That was the kind of card that we have.

Okay. So moving on. You also gave evidence that General Karpeh formed a group amongst the Liberians in Sierra Leone and that the group was named the LUDF, Liberian United Democratic Forces, correct?

You are correct.

If an exhibit could be pulled up please, and that's P-249.

Madam President, while this is just being brought up, on an entirely different note, can I ask for Mr Taylor to be excused for a short time?

Certainly. Mr Taylor may be escorted out. Thank you.

Mr Witness, I'm not trying to show you a photograph this time. I wanted to show you an extract from the reports of the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission and that's the front page, but if we could go to page 125. And towards the bottom of that page in the big paragraph there's a sentence that starts "a Mandingo faction movement for the redemption of Muslims". Can you see that? Yes, you are there. So I'll just read that out. It says as follows:

"A Mandingo faction Movement for the Redemption of Muslims (MRM) founded by Alhaji Kromah and a Krahn faction, Liberia United Defence Force (LUDF) organised by a US trained Special Forces officer who was also once Doe's Minister of Defence and ambassador to Sierra Leone, Albert Karpeh, together, merged into the United Liberation Movement For Democracy (ULIMO) on May 29, 1991 in the Republic of Guinea."

Now, Mr Witness, it's correct, isn't it, that ULIMO was formed as a result of this merger of the MRM and the LUDF?

You are correct.

And it's also correct that, as is stated in this report, that merger took place on 29 May 1991, correct?

Well, I have told you I've been a military man. Dates is my problem, but I could tell you the year is '91, but the month I could not tell you.

Okay. Can you help with this: It was - you first joined a group in Bo, correct?

Bo was just a rallying point.

Yes. And how - are you able to give an indication in terms of months of how long the war had been going on in Sierra Leone before you joined ULIMO?

That was about four to five months when the war entered Sierra Leone.

I'm grateful for that. If the witness could also be shown P-426, please.

Mr Munyard, I assumed that Mr Taylor had stepped out momentarily. Is it - should the trial proceed in his absence?

I'm content for it to proceed in his absence, yes, for the time being. If there's any development or any change, I'm sure we'll be notified.

Very well.

So the next document that I'm going to show you is an excerpt from a book and it's a book entitled "Liberia's Civil War: Nigeria, ECOMOG, and regional security in West Africa". As you can see from the screen, it's written by Adekeye Adebajo. So I'm going to turn to page 91, please. There's a passage on that page with a line - towards the top of that page with a line drawn next to it, so I'm just going to limit myself to that passage. It reads as follows:

"The United Liberation Movement of Liberia for Democracy was founded on 29 May 1991. It described itself as a 'non-tribal and nonsectarian organisation borne out of the desire of displaced Liberians to return home and continue their search for democratic freedom'; its members aimed to free Liberia 'from the plunder of Charles Taylor'."

Now, it's correct, isn't it, that one of the aims of ULIMO was indeed to free Liberia from the plunder of Charles Taylor?

There is a sentence that I'm not too conversant with because you lawyers play with words too much. You are saying that "from the plunder of Charles Taylor", well, I'm not comfortable with that word. But our aim was to make sure that we toppled that government. That was our aim objective, not because "from the plunder of Charles Taylor". That is language I'm not comfortable with.

That's fair enough, Mr Witness. I'm --

Before we go any further, can I just inquire, is that document that my learned friend is now showing the witness on the screen, because I'm not clear on my screen, my learned friend hasn't quoted it with an exhibit number, if it is an exhibit. And I --

It is an exhibit, Mr Munyard, exhibit P-426.

I didn't get that exhibit number, I'm afraid, and I looked on the LiveNote and I couldn't see an exhibit number for that.

It is on the LiveNote.

Very well. Well, I will bring it up in that case. Thank you.

It's page 19, line 14.

In any event, I've finished with the exhibit now. Thank you.

Before you proceed, Mr Witness, you just said that you are not comfortable with the phrase "from the plunder of Charles Taylor", but you've also just told the Court that the desire of ULIMO was to overthrow Taylor.

That's correct.

Overthrow Taylor for what reason?

As I have said earlier, from the political - let's say the tribal part of this whole conflict, as I've told you, I have a Mandingo background, and since we crossed over into Sierra Leone, it was impossible for a lot of Mandingos to go into Liberia to settle because there was this still rumours of Gio and Manos attacking Mandingos and Krahns. So the only alternative to go back was to make sure we come together, fight, and to overthrow that government.

Yes, but you haven't answered my question. Why? Why? What was wrong with the government, in other words? What was wrong with Mr Taylor's government that would cause you to overthrow?

Because we have no access to go back home. And the only way to get to go back home, because of our tribal links, was to go militarily and there was no way you could remove Mr Taylor at that time, whether through the ballot of the box, it was impossible.

Thank you. Please proceed, Ms Howarth.

Wasn't it the case that Mandingos and Krahns were being killed by Mr Taylor's NPFL forces?

Say again?

Wasn't it the case that at that time Mandingos and Krahns were being killed by Mr Taylor's NPFL forces?

You are correct.

And isn't that the reason why you and the Liberians, with you in Bo at that time, wanted to go back and overthrow Charles Taylor?

The first reason, as I told you in my first statement here, was that we joined ULIMO for our own safety in Sierra Leone. That was the very first thing I told you. Then the second aim, after I'm based now, was to make sure that, yes, we go back home and to overthrow that government.

Now, before you were able to achieve that aim of overthrowing Charles Taylor, your initial objective was to assist the SLAs, wasn't it?

You are correct.

And is it fair to say that the aim was after liberating Sierra Leone from the rebels the understanding was that, after having done that, ULIMO would go back to Liberia and overthrow Charles Taylor, correct?

You are correct.

And is it fair to say at the time I suppose when you are training in Kenema that ULIMO had few weapons at this time?

You are correct.

And you did explain in your evidence that the Government of Sierra Leone provided ULIMO with support in terms of training, some stipends, some arms and ammunition?

You are correct.

But they didn't provide ULIMO with heavy artillery, did they?

Yes. The heavy artilleries I'm talking about like twin barrels, BZTs, but they did give us anti-aircraft.

So what's the answer to my question? The question was they didn't provide ULIMO with heavy artillery?

But artillery is divided. You have heavy artilleries and you have jungle artillery. That anti-aircraft is divided. You have one barrel, you have the twin barrel. They never gave us the twin barrel but we were using the single barrel which we called the AA.

I'm grateful. Now it's right, isn't it, that the Government of Sierra Leone justified their support of ULIMO because of Charles Taylor's support of the rebels, the RUF?

Of course. You are correct.

I just want to move on to what happens after your training - sorry, I will just move first to your training in Kenema. That was at the Tormah base, correct?

You are correct.

Now, somebody called Abu Keita, are you familiar with that name?

I am familiar with that name.

He is not somebody who trained with you, ULIMO, in Sierra Leone, is he?

Your question?

He didn't train with ULIMO in Sierra Leone at that time, did he?

No, I never saw him on the base. At that time I was on that base I never saw him.

Now, having conducted some training at the base you then quite soon were engaged in combat with the SLA fighting the rebels, correct?

You are correct.

First of all you are deployed to Joru?

That's correct.

Then you are deployed on the Pujehun axis?

That's correct.

You capture Zimmi and push the RUF towards the border, correct?

That's correct.

And you then cross into Liberia but you are forced to make a tactical withdrawal as you run short of supplies. Is that correct?

That's correct.

And you returned to Bo?

That's correct.

And it's at Bo that you meet Roosevelt Johnson for the first time?

You are correct.

And after that Roosevelt Johnson explains that you will go and finish the job in Pujehun and then cross into Liberia?

That's also correct.

And I appreciate what you have said about dates and that they are difficult, but would I be right in saying that this would be approximately the end of '92, 1993?

Say again?

As I said, I appreciate that dates can be difficult for you but would I be right in saying that it would be about the end of 1992 or 1993 that this finishing the job in Pujehun and crossing into Liberia occurs?

Yeah, it was between '92 and '93 respectively, yes.

And am I right that when you're engaged in Pujehun at this time, that there are NPFL elements assisting the RUF in Pujehun?

Say again?

Am I right that when you are engaged at Pujehun at this time, that there are NPFL elements assisting the RUF in Pujehun?

Please simplify this question for me so I understand properly.

So at the end of 1992, 1993 you go to Pujehun with ULIMO?

Yeah.

And you're engaged in fighting in Pujehun?

Correct.

And you're fighting against the RUF?

That's correct.

And there are also NPFL elements assisting the RUF in Pujehun, correct?

I cannot confirm that to you because we knew initially that Corporal Saybana Foday Sankoh had declared that he was not fighting in Sierra Leone and that the RUF was an independent body, they are fighting on their own. So I cannot just clarify whether NPFL were fighting on the side now. But we knew very well at that time that we are fighting RUF at that time.

Mr Witness, have you ever said to anyone before that NPFL elements were assisting the RUF in Pujehun at this time?

If I have ever said that to anybody?

Yes.

I have never said NPFL elements. Let me clarify certain fact to you that you need to know and understand. Pujehun is very close to Liberia. If you leave Pujehun it's just an hour and 30 minutes' drive to Monrovia. But immediately you cross the border you are in Liberia from Gendema. And the advice in Liberia on the other side of the border, there are people that are called Kaw in Sierra Leone that also speak the same Vai. There are Mendes on this side, there are also Mendes on that side. And if you get closer to that border you realise that even the Sierra Leoneans use the Liberian currency very much because the distance to do business in Kenema is very far, so it's easy to do business in Monrovia. So intermarriages occur between that borderline. So a lot of people speak Liberian English on the Sierra Leone side, likewise on the other side of Liberian border. So speaking Liberian English at that initial stage cannot identify whether this person is an NPFL or whether he is a Sierra Leonean that speaks Liberian English. So I cannot tell you about NPFL at that time. I know of RUF that was fighting in that axis.

Before you proceed, the witness mentioned the name of a tribe I think known as the Vai, isn't it?

That's correct.

And you said at page 27 line 7 and the Vias in Liberia on the other side of the border, there are people that are called what in Sierra Leone?

In Mende they call them Kawblah.

How do you spell that?

Well, I don't know the exact spelling but you bring a Mende interpreter. In the actual Pujehun District we call it there Kawblah. They speak the same dialect as Vai.

Mr Witness, you gave quite a long answer there but in doing so I don't believe you actually answered my question so I'm going to ask it to you again. Have you ever said to anyone before that NPFL elements were assisting the RUF in Pujehun at this time?

No.

Thank you. Returning to the attack on Pujehun, this attack was successful, wasn't it?

Correct.

And the RUF were forced to flee across the border, correct?

You are correct.

Ms Howarth, I thought I would just mention for the record Mr Taylor walked in five minutes ago.

Now you just agreed that the - perhaps I'll put the question again. You agreed that the RUF were forced to flee across the border. It's right that you pushed them to Cape Mount?

That's correct.

And, having done so, your group moved towards Bomi Hills. Is that right?

That's correct.

And is it fair to say that when you fought against the RUF at the Pujehun axis that they had a very good command structure?

What do you mean by good command structure?

They were well organised.

Well, I don't understand what you mean by well organised.

Okay, I'm going to put the question - I don't think it's a difficult one but I'm sure someone will jump in and tell me I'm wrong if it is. The RUF when you fought against them in Pujehun had a very good command structure, yes or no?

Well, I could not tell you yes or no because when you are talking about good command structure I don't want to go that much far. If you could ask me on my side whether we are fighting to good command structure I would tell you yes.

What do you understand by the expression very good command structure? If you were saying that what would you mean?

What would I mean?

Yes.

I would be talking about effective command and control.

Well, is that what you would mean by very good command structure?

That's correct.

So would you agree that the RUF has a very good command structure at this time in terms of effective command and control?

Yes, because moving men and controlling men under your command and they do exactly what you want them to do, it means you are effective.

So you agree?

That's correct.

What do you agree to? What are you agreeing to, Mr Witness? Did you hear the question properly? The question related to whether or not the RUF at that time had a very good command structure and your answer is you agree.

Say again.

The question was whether or not the RUF at that time had a very good command structure. Is your answer that you agree with that statement?

That's what I'm telling you. I was not fighting on the side of the RUF. So me telling you that the RUF had a very good command structure, it means I was part of the RUF.

Do you agree that the RUF had a very good command structure at this time, yes or no?

No.

Have you ever told anyone that the RUF had a very good command structure at this time?

No.

Are you sure about that?

No.

You are not sure?

I'm sure.

You're sure you haven't ever told anyone?

Yes.

Now you gave evidence about your ULIMO group linking up with another ULIMO group who came through Sierra Leone at Grand Cape Mount, correct?

You are correct.

And you explained how the combined group took control of Grand Cape Mount and Bomi Hills?

You are correct.

And you also went on to explain that there came a point in time where this combined ULIMO group splits up and it becomes ULIMO-J and ULIMO-K, correct?

That's correct.

Now it's after this break-up that ULIMO-K then take control of Lofa County. Is that correct?

That's correct.

Now, again I appreciate that dates are difficult for you but would you agree that this break-up occurred in the year 1994?

Yes, we are now in '94 because it was '93 earlier and the second was in '94, yeah.

I'm grateful.

I'm sorry, but the witness keeps, I don't know, saying things that I for one haven't actually heard and they appear as indiscernible. Mr Witness, can I ask you to speak clearly and slowly because whatever you are saying is evidence and is being captured on the record. I'm not going to tire asking you, otherwise your evidence will be useless if we cannot have it recorded. Perhaps the witness may wish to repeat that last answer. "We are now in 1994" something something "second was in '94, yes." What did you say?

The question again?

Yes. The question was do you agree that the break-up of ULIMO-K - I'm sorry, the break-up of ULIMO into ULIMO-K and ULIMO-J occurred in 1994?

Yes.

Mr Witness, are you familiar with the name Oliver Varney?

I heard about that name.

Who was he?

Well, the name I heard by he was an NPFL. That's what I heard.

And as well as him being an NPFL what else, if anything, did you hear about him?

Nothing absolutely.

Did you know, for example - I hope you appreciate it's a long time ago now. Did you know him to be a close associate of Charles Taylor?

I can't tell because I have never seen him in person. I only heard about that name and I don't know whether he was a very close associate. I cannot say that.

I appreciate that you've never seen him in person, but even sometimes if we don't see someone in person we can know something about them. So did you know him to be a close associate to Charles Taylor?

I only know him as an NPFL. I don't know whether he was a close associate to Mr Taylor.

Did you know him to be a strong fighter?

What do you mean by "strong fighter"?

Someone who is known as a strong fighter, a good fighter, successful fighter.

Any man who carries a gun and is taking town is a strong fighter, so I don't know what you mean by strong fighter.

I'm not going to argue with you on this, Mr Witness. Did you know him to be a strong fighter or not?

That's a word I'm not too comfortable, strong fighter.

Very well. Have --

Mr Witness, it is usually better for you to answer directly either "yes" or "no" or "I don't know", rather than to argue about semantics. You understand me?

Yes.

Have you ever told anyone that Oliver Varney was a close associate to Charles Taylor and a strong fighter?

No.

Are you sure about that answer?

I'm very much sure.

Do you have any knowledge of any deal done between ULIMO and Oliver Varney?

No.

The name General Degbon, am I right that you also wouldn't be familiar with that name?

No.

Is that you don't know the name General Degbon or you do?

I don't know.

You know the name General Degbon?

No.

You don't know the name General Degbon?

I don't know.

Can you tell us who --

Again, because of the way I think the witness speaks, he said, "I don't know," but that appears as "I do". Mr Witness be very careful how you speak, please.

Your question again.

Perhaps so it's clear: Do you know the name General Degbon?

No.

Do you know General Degbon?

No.

Do you know who Rasta Lamin is? Rasta Lamin, does that name mean anything to you?

No.

Do you know the name Gibril Massaquoi?

Yes.

And who is he?

He was a commander in the RUF.

And did you ever meet him?

Yes. I met Gibril Massaquoi after disarmament in Sierra Leone.

And what were - when was that?

After the disarmament in Sierra Leone.

Can you help as to a year?

That was around 1999 going towards 2000, because after the January 6 invasion in 1999, disarmament started mid-June, July going towards December now.

And where was it that you met him?

Gibril Massaquoi?

Yes.

In Bo.

Was this the first time you met him or not?

It was the very first time. We all met together.

Now, you - did you - Gibril Massaquoi, did you ever meet him in Gambia?

In Kambia?

Gambia.

Kambia.

Gambia, G-A-M-B-I-A.

That's Gambia, yes.

Did you meet him there?

Gibril Massaquoi?

Yeah.

I have told you I only met Gibril Massaquoi after disarmament in Bo.

Okay. So you're saying you never met him --

No.

-- in Gambia? Am I right that you never met Gibril Massaquoi in Gambia?

Yeah.

Have you ever told anyone that you did meet Gibril Massaquoi in Gambia?

No.

Mike Lamin, you mentioned him on Monday when you were asked about RUF commanders. Do you remember that?

That's correct.

Can you tell me how - how did you know the name Mike Lamin?

Well, as I have told you earlier on, we were fighting along this Pujehun axis and initially it was at this area that Mike Lamin, Gibril Massaquoi and the other commanders were fighting. So when we are fighting, anyway, we are fortunate to have prisoners of war. We first and foremost like to know their commanders, their strength and the type of weapon they are using and - that kind of questions. And it is from those that were captured that we heard this name Gibril Massaquoi as their commander and Mike Lamin.

And who were these prisoners of war that you captured?

Those were RUFs.

Do you recall their names?

I cannot recall their names, but I could tell you that those that were captured, I know their tribes in Sierra Leone. I could tell you.

Very well.

Very well, yes.

Did the witness answer, "Those were warriors," or did he say "RUF"? Or what did you say, Mr Witness?

I said they were RUFs, fighters that were captured.

How do you know they were RUFs?

They were captured in combat.

And is that why you think they were RUFs?

That's correct.

And your evidence is that they told you that Mike Lamin and Gibril Massaquoi were commanders at that time?

That's correct.

Now, it's correct, isn't it - I'm moving on now to 1994. It's right that ULIMO factions attacked Gbarnga in 1994?

You are correct.

And can you remind me, for how long do you say that ULIMO were able to hold on to Gbarnga for at this time?

It never took too long. It was within 1 - 10 to 15 days, either 1 or 10 days, because I told you I was shot in Bong Mines and I was there for treatment when this attack occurred. I was not in Gbarnga of itself, and I was in Bong Mines and had no good treatment, so I was moved to Monrovia for better treatment. So the time frame I cannot tell you, but it lasted for about 1 to 15 - either 10 days or 15 days, then they were flushed out.

Okay. Perhaps you can also tell us this: How you came to learn about the Gbarnga attack. If you were in the hospital, how did you gain this information?

No, I told you before the Gbarnga mission I was in Sierra Leone. Most of our colleagues, because we were having vehicles running from Liberia now to the border and all this type of things, so I told you I came on the pass and I was in Bo and a colleague told me that they were asking each and every fighter that is on pass to return back to headquarters. And I told you in that, my testimony, that I came back and reported to my headquarters. We were then moved to the front line where I was shot. It was in that advance towards Gbarnga that I was shot but in Bong Mines.

I see.

So I was never fortunate to enter Gbarnga.

I understand. So at the beginning of this offensive you received an injury. Is that right?

That's right.

Now, you explained that you were - the attack lasted in Gbarnga for - that you held Gbarnga for 10 to 15 days, or fighting lasted for 10 to 15 days?

As I've told you, I was not at the front line at that time now, but those that were there told me the first - the fighting lasted for about two or three days, then there was a lull in fighting. They were trying to consider position when the NPFL came back after ten days and retook Gbarnga from them.

So for about ten days ULIMO held Gbarnga, correct?

That's correct.

Okay. Now, can you help with this: Why were ULIMO unable to continue to hold Gbarnga beyond that ten days?

Because, one, there were not too much coordination between the J and K factions still. That's the most - because there was self-interest. There was no one central command because it was just a combined force to take Gbarnga. And when it was taken, there was no effective command and control, so --

What about the NPFL, what were they doing whilst ULIMO held Gbarnga for these ten days?

They retreated to regroup and come back.

And did they come back?

Yes, they made a comeback.

And when they came back, they had fresh supplies, didn't they?

I cannot tell you whether they had fresh supplies, but they came back and retook Gbarnga.

It's right, isn't it, that they had fresh supplies from the Ivorian border and it was because of these fresh supplies that ULIMO were unable to withstand the pressure, correct?

I was not on the Ivory Coast side of the border. As I've told you, I was injured in hospital. So to clarify that, I cannot clarify whether they had fresh supplies or not. But all I could tell you is that they took back Gbarnga.

Was it something that you heard that the NPFL had got fresh supplies from the Ivorian border?

No.

Have you ever told anybody that the NPFL got fresh supplies from the Ivorian border?

No.

And have you ever told anyone that it was because of these fresh supplies that ULIMO were unable to withstand the pressure?

No.

Are you sure about that?

I'm sure.

And finally on this topic, when ULIMO were able to capture and hold Gbarnga, albeit for a short period, it's right that this was a purely ULIMO offensive; correct?

That's correct.

And there was no assistance from any other forces, correct?

No. There was assistance from another unit, but I never met that unit. They used to call them the LPC. There was a small unit that was also fighting along that axis that helped them.

There was no assistance from the NPFL, for example, was there?

From the NPFL to retake - to take Gbarnga from --

From the NPFL.

The question is confusing.

ULIMO were not assisted by the NPFL, were they, at this time?

No.

I'm going to skip a bit further ahead in the chronology now. I want to - you mentioned your injury and the fact that you were in hospital, correct?

That's correct.

Now, I understood from your testimony that you were discharged from hospital and when you did so you returned to Bo.

That's correct.

And you did say to see your family who were in Bo at that time.

That's correct.

And during this time the elections take place while - I'm so sorry let me rephrase that. During the time that you are in Bo, President Tejan Kabbah is elected, correct?

That's correct.

Now, you then remain in Bo in Sierra Leone until after the AFRC coup, correct?

That is correct.

And then you explained that approximately two weeks after the coup you return to Liberia, Monrovia.

You are correct.

And the coup took place in May 1997, correct?

I believe so, because I cannot remember the dates too much, I've told you.

Do you remember as being in 1997?

Yes, it was 1997.

So you then returned to Monrovia?

That's correct.

And there comes a time when you are then re - recruited into the Special Forces, you said?

You are correct.

And this takes place at the Ricks Institute?

Correct.

Now, having joined the Special Forces you then participate in fighting in Sierra Leone once again, correct?

That's correct.

Sorry, I should scrub "once again". Just you participated in fighting in Sierra Leone?

Can I just raise a point?

Yes.

Please I would like to ease myself and come back.

The witness may be shown out, please.

Please proceed, Ms Howarth.

Yes, just to recap where we were before, so we had had the AFRC coup in Sierra Leone which you had agreed was in 1997 and then you explained your return to Monrovia, and then you were recruited into the Special Forces, correct?

That's correct.

And then you returned to Sierra Leone, correct?

That's correct.

And you are participating in fighting in Sierra Leone?

That's correct.

And you are at this time a member of the Special Forces and you are fighting alongside Chief Samuel Hinga Norman's CDF?

Correct.

It's right that during the time that you are participating in this fighting the AFRC or JPK government are in power in Freetown?

That's correct.

So you described being part of a group that took Zimmi, correct?

That's correct.

And I'm right that the JPK government were in power in Freetown during this attack on Zimmi, correct?

That's correct.

And you also talked about the RUF retaking Zimmi, correct?

That's correct.

And this also occurred during the JPK government being in power in Freetown?

That's correct.

And you mentioned the establishment of Base Zero?

That's correct.

And am I right that this also occurred during the JPK government being in power in Freetown?

Correct.

And you also talked about a movement from Zimmi to Kenema. Did this also occur during the JPK government being in power in Freetown?

That's correct.

Finally you mentioned Operation Black December?

That's correct.

And this is something that you - an operation you took part in. Is that right?

That's correct.

And again this operation took place while the JPK government were in power in Freetown?

That's correct.

And as per the name Black December, this took place in December 1997?

That's correct.

Now moving to a different point. Can you help me with this: Once Charles Taylor became the President in Liberia it's right that ULIMO-J became a target, correct?

Well, initially ULIMO-J and all the other warring factions were participating in that government but it only became a full threat when the incident occurred at Njala House. It was at that time that there was threats on ULIMO fighters.

I'm going to just put the question again that once Charles Taylor became the President ULIMO-J became a target, didn't they?

No.

Have you ever said to anyone --

I'm sorry, I wonder if my learned friend would say it became a target of whom? It's a terribly open-ended question as it stands.

I take the point. I'm quite happy to rephrase it in that way:

Once Charles Taylor became the President ULIMO-J became a target of Charles Taylor, correct?

No.

Have you ever suggested to anyone that ULIMO-J did indeed become a target once Mr Taylor was elected?

I told my team that ULIMO-J only became a target after the Njala House incident.

Moving to a different point, could the witness please be shown D-340.

Sorry, Mr Witness, you said something, an incident that occurred at the Njala House. What incident is this that you are referring to again?

The Njala House was where, as I said earlier on, Roosevelt Johnson was residing in Monrovia at Camp Johnson Road.

Who was residing?

Roosevelt Johnson, the then leader of ULIMO-J.

So this incident is synonymous with the Camp Johnson Road incident. We've sometimes referred to it as that. Is that correct?

That's correct.

Mr Witness, just before we get to that exhibit, when you said "my team", who were you referring to?

I said I told my Defence team.

Thank you.

[Inaudible].

So this is a Defence exhibit from the official journal of the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS, as you can see at the top, and there's a date there which is August 1997. The front page number 7 says, "Extending the scope of activity and mandate of ECOMOG to cover Sierra Leone." If we could just turn over the page, please, to page 13. So at the bottom there it reads: "Decision A/DEC.7/8/97, extending the scope of activity and mandate of ECOMOG to cover Sierra Leone." Towards the bottom it says:

"Considering that the objectives being pursued by ECOWAS with regard to the situation prevailing in Sierra Leone following the coup d'etat of 25 May 1997 of the speedy reinstatement of the legitimate government of President Ahmad Tejan Kabbah; the restoration of peace and security in Sierra Leone and the resolution of the problem of refugees and displaced persons" and skipping two paragraphs: "Considering that the intransigence and negative attitude shown by the junta constitute a serious obstacle to the efforts being made by ECOWAS to ensure a peaceful settlement of the crisis and poses a serious threat to peace and security in the sub-region; deeply concerned at the worsening of the crisis in Sierra Leone; convinced that the strict application of certain measures instituted to make possible the attainment of the objective of ECOWAS requires the urgent intervention of the armed forces" and finally at the bottom of that page: "The scope of activity of ECOMOG is hereby extended into the territory of Sierra Leone to assist in creating the conducive atmosphere that will ensure the early reinstatement of the legitimate Government of Sierra Leone."

Mr Witness, having read that, it's right, isn't it, that ECOMOG's mandate was extended after the elections in Liberia to cover Sierra Leone, correct?

That's correct.

And if I can now just refer to D-62, please. Mr Witness, this is another Defence exhibit. It's simply a chronology of events in Sierra Leone and I wanted to turn to page 6, please. There's an entry dated July 1997. There's just one point I wanted to refer to, that's the final sentence under the entry for July 1997: "Nigeria moved 4,000 troops from its operations in Liberia to Freetown." Do you see that?

Correct.

Now, that statement is correct, isn't it, that there was redeployment of troops from Liberia to Sierra Leone; correct?

Yeah, you are correct.

And I'm right that after this redeployment of 4,000, ECOMOG, from Liberia, there continued to be further redeployment, correct?

That's correct.

And so eventually there were only a small number of ECOMOG left in Liberia, correct?

I cannot tell you the strength of ECOMOG in Liberia at that time because I was not an ECOMOG soldier, so I will not tell you the exact strength. So I cannot just tell you a small strength was in Liberia.

But you agree, don't you, that there was this redeployment from Liberia to Sierra Leone?

That's correct.

And you will agree, won't you, that ECOMOG's concern became the war in Sierra Leone; didn't it?

That's correct.

And the aim being to restore democracy in Sierra Leone?

You are correct.

And at that time the aim of overthrowing Charles Taylor had been forgotten about on your part, correct?

On the part of Special Forces?

Yeah.

Yeah, our mission was to reinstate Alhaji Dr Ahmad Tejan Kabbah.

Now, it's correct, isn't it, that LURD and ULIMO fighters were aware of the most important of Charles Taylor's commanders, correct?

Break that question down for me, please.

How about yourself, you were aware of the most important of Charles Taylor's commanders, correct? The names of the most important of Charles Taylor's commanders, you knew some of those names, did you not?

Yes. I used to hear about them, but I don't know them personally.

And one of the names that you knew was Zigzag Marzah, correct?

I know of that name, correct.

And you knew him as a member of Jungle Fire. Is that right?

I don't know him as a member of Jungle Fire.

He was a member of Jungle Fire, wasn't he?

Was he? I don't know of him as Jungle Fire. What I do know of Jungle Fire - maybe it's a mistake from that - Jungle Fire, when we entered Lofa, the code name of the operation was Operation Jungle Fire. So that was the operation that we are leading, Operation Jungle Fire. So I don't know whether he was part because he was not LURD and we are LURD, so I don't know what you mean by Jungle Fire. Jungle Fire was the operational name given to the operation when we entered the jungle in Lofa.

You heard of Zigzag Marzah as being somebody who was going to lead an attack on Voinjama, correct?

That's correct.

Can you please tell me, what else did you hear about Zigzag Marzah?

Well, the only time we got information was at briefing when we were told that - from intelligence gathering that he was coming with a troupe to retake Voinjama, and then we were told to move and make sure that the route he uses must be properly ambushed. But by the time we get to that place he was not even there, so that was the end of it.

Madam President, I've essentially covered all the points in cross-examination that I believe I'm able to, aside from those in relation to which we were not on notice and in relation to which there are some further investigations being carried out. Ms Hollis previously indicated that we would need perhaps until the end of next week to carry out those investigations, so I would request that the remainder of the cross-examination be postponed until that time. I would add that I do believe I've done the bulk of what I had planned to do.

We just note that we were presented with a bundle of documents this morning. Was there a point to these documents?

There may well have been a point, but in the end the witness was able to provide an answer without me needing to refer to them, so they will be rendered redundant.

I'll ask this as well: Throughout your questions this morning we've observed that you keep asking the witness "have you ever told anyone thus and thus", "have you ever told anyone thus and thus", and then you've moved on. We're just wondering whether there's a point to questions like that.

Perhaps I could answer that question in the absence of the witness, if I would be allowed to. There is a point.

Very well. Let me just confer with my colleagues concerning your request to adjourn.

We're just wondering - and this probably may be a question for Ms Hollis or for yourself, Ms Howarth - the Prosecution keeps using the phrase "until the end of next week" or the end of next week is next week Friday, it's a week tomorrow, are you saying that you will only be able to proceed with the balance of the cross-examination Monday - a week Monday? Is that what you are saying?

Perhaps I could defer to Ms Hollis on this point.

Thank you, Madam President. What we are saying with that is that we have had to send several taskings to Freetown and we wish to ensure that we have ample time to be able to complete those taskings so that we can proceed with the rest of the cross-examination. Our estimate, because of the taskings and the requirements of those taskings, is that it may very well take us until the end of next week to have that information. So in order to give the - your Honours an accurate estimate of the time we would need, I have indicated that we would not be prepared to proceed, in our evaluation, until the end of next week and what I meant by that was to be able to proceed by Friday of next week if another witness had finished. But that was what was meant by that phrase, Madam President.

Because you see there's a need for the Defence to have some indication as to when this witness can travel back home and so we cannot work with phrases as vague as "the end of next week". I would like for the Prosecution to give me a day and even a date when this witness should return to Court for cross-examination in your estimation.

Well, again I will give an estimate because I cannot tell you with certainty when the task will be done. If your Honours want a date at which we must proceed regardless, then I would give the date of a week from this coming Monday. I think that would be the 21st, I believe.

Mr Munyard, what witness or witnesses are we expecting come Monday?

Madam President, a witness was due to have arrived this morning, having travelled overnight. I have made arrangements to see that witness at the end of the Court day today with a view to proofing her and hopefully having her in Court tomorrow morning. However, she is a very short witness and I don't anticipate her evidence taking much more than tomorrow. Indeed we might even finish her during the course of tomorrow.

The next witness is not due to arrive until sometime on Saturday, again having travelled overnight, and I know that my learned friend who is going to be dealing with that witness will need two or three days to proof that witness. And so as your Honours know from what we said earlier in the week, some of these events have been completely beyond our control and so we do not anticipate being able to have a witness in Court on Monday because of the need to proof that witness.

Now, at this stage if your Honours would give me just a moment to confer, I'll be able to indicate hopefully whether we are anticipating being able to have that witness in Court on Tuesday. If you would give me just a moment.

Thank you for the opportunity. Madam President, the position is we anticipate being likely to call that other witness on Tuesday afternoon. In other words, what --

Mr Munyard, let me be quite succinct. What is the pseudonym of the witness you are calling tomorrow, Friday?

285.

Is it not 299? Isn't this the witness you had indicated?

Again I'm not good on the numbers. I'll have to just check but I'm sure it's 285. Would you bear with me for a moment?

Apparently in an email I incorrectly said 299 was the next one. 285 is the next one who we believe - can I tell you this, we believe that witness has arrived this morning. I have not had confirmation but I have had an indication from WVS that they intend to bring that witness here at the end of today for me to see the witness. Therefore I'm assuming that's all predicated on the basis she has in fact arrived. The one who will then follow is 299.

Very well. This is what we've decided to do. We're going to adjourn the proceedings to tomorrow morning at 9.30 to hear the evidence of your next witness, and I'm going to stand over the current witness DCT-190 until Monday, 21 June for continuation of his cross-examination. And then we will take the witnesses as they come along.

Can I raise one matter and that relates to 299. I know the Court's previous practice has been that where we've interposed a witness we have always taken that witness in their entirety. Can I inquire that that's the proposal of the Court, that once we embark on 299 we continue with her until the end of her evidence and then bring the current witness back?

And I also propose that we cross that bridge when we get to it. I think this is what I've said. The Court adjourns to tomorrow, 9.30.