Trials and Denials in Cambodia

No Justice?

2006-12-20T16:36:00.000+07:00

The latest publication to weigh in on the ECCC is the Economist with this gloomy story on the progress of the court. It laments the lack of funds, staff and political will, and questions how it will be possible to proceed. The author appears to be willing to give up on the process before it has even begun, seeing the hurdles as being just too high to overcome. The article even suggests that the international judges are 'sending a message' that they may not want to proceed even if the UN does.

Hard to know if all this is based on the authors own view of situation, or if the judges have been given off-the-record comments about their imminent departure. Meanwhile, there has been no indication of any work stoppage at the court, and several members of the ECCC have been appearing in front of the Cambodian Journalists Club to talk up the court and push them to keep up local news coverage.

At the same time, according the the Cambodia Daily, 'official letters' have been moving back and forth between the Deputy Prime Minster Sok An and the United Nations in New York over the Extraordinary Chambers Defence Office. The good news I supposed is that everyone is still talking to each other and working. The bad news... well I guess we will see what happens at the end of January.

No justice in this world
Dec 19th 2006 | PHNOM PENH
From The Economist print edition
Death is more likely than the law to catch up with the Khmers Rouges

“THINGS are going well,” says Robert Petit, a Canadian co-prosecutor at the UN-backed tribunal set up to try Khmers Rouges leaders for their atrocities. Five months after it started work, he says he is ready to recommend the first indictment as soon as the tribunal's Cambodian and international jurists have agreed on its rules of procedure. Sadly, no one is sure when, or even if, that will happen. Human Rights Watch, a lobby group, believes that “political interference has brought the whole process to a screeching halt.” A plenary meeting of Cambodian and foreign judges convened in late November to reach agreement. It proved a disastrous exercise in mutual incomprehension. Cambodian judges, who appeared to be taking instructions from elsewhere, reportedly complained that there was not enough time to get through the 113 articles in the draft rules, and that they paid too much heed to international, not national, law. The foreigners resisted but were dismayed by the refusal of the Cambodians to engage in serious discussion.

It was never going to be easy to deliver justice to victims of the Khmers Rouges 28 years after the end of their rule, which killed up to 2m people. Top leaders, starting with Pol Pot, have already died. With every delay it is more likely others will be dead before indictment. The tribunal's official title, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), hints at its limitations. Compared with the recent tribunals on former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, Sierra Leone and East Timor, Cambodia's is much more firmly based in national law. Under the agreement wrung by Hun Sen, the prime minister, from a reluctant UN in 2003, it is the first to have a majority of national judges.

Unfortunately, existing Cambodian law is weak on the crimes the tribunal is investigating. Worse, the judiciary is one of the world's least qualified and most corrupt. Human-rights groups say it is not an instrument of justice but a political tool. Moreover, Hun Sen and other prominent government figures are themselves former Khmers Rouges and are assumed to remain sensitive about the tribunal's investigations and its targets for prosecution.

The tribunal remains dogged by other weaknesses. There is a disturbing lack of safeguards for witnesses. The meagre budget so far provided by Japan and Western governments leaves the ECCC acutely short of manpower and equipment. Jim Goldston, a leading American international jurist has accused governments of feebly acquiescing in “official ineptitude, power-grabbing and duplicitousness”.

The tribunal has given its rules committee until the end of January to agree on procedures that meet international standards. If it does, these will go to a new plenary, probably in February. If not, Ban Ki-moon, the new UN secretary-general, will have to decide whether to exercise the opt-out clause inserted in the UN's agreement with Cambodia—precisely for fear of political interference. But even if the UN does remain engaged, the message foreign judges are sending is that they may not.

Duch and Letters to New York

2006-12-19T08:27:00.000+07:00

A few interesting stories in the local news this week. First an article from the Phnom Penh Post asking if it is right for one of the most notorious Khmer Rouge leaders, Duch, to have been left in a military without a trial or any charges. He was apparently arrested under the ECCC law, but is still under the authority of the Cambodian government until the ECCC is ready to start prosecuting. Shadows of ‘GITMO’ here. He clearly belongs behind bars, but how can he be held without charge while others walk free? The ECCC Spokesperson notes that he is still under government authority so it is up to them to resolve the issue. It unlikely they will free him before the start of the ECCC trials, so expect the issue to be raised at his defence.

In the Daily we have a far more interesting story of a letter from the Deputy PM Sok An to the United Nations Headquarters. The letter indicates the governments unhappiness with the Defence Support Section of the ECCC and then suggests it might be good to open a ‘political dialogue’. That could mean reopening the whole negotiation process. It no wonder many are calling it the second step (after stalling on the Internal Rules) of a concentrated effort by the Cambodian government to stall the trials until every potential criminal has died. The mood of the ECCC staff can not be too positive these days.

Calls for infamous Duch to go free
By Charles McDermid and Sam Rith

The pretrial detention of Kaing Khek Iev, better known by his nom de guerre Duch, is drawing increased criticism from attorneys, analysts and international human rights groups such as Amnesty International. Duch, former commandant of the Khmer Rouge torture and interrogation center S-21 at Tuol Sleng, has been incarcerated in a military prison without trial since 1999.

A London-based spokesperson for Amnesty International wrote to the Post on December 14 that Article 9 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Cambodia ratified in 1992, guarantees the right of anyone arrested or
detained to be brought promptly before a judge or judicial officer and tried within a reasonable time or freed.

"Duch is obviously no exception, and must be allowed to enjoy these basic human rights," the spokesperson said by e-mail. "Even though the case against Duch may be complicated and establishment of the Extraordinary Chambers has been delayed, over six years in pretrial detention is clearly not in compliance with international standards."

And in Phnom Penh, an American legal expert is maintaining that abuses of Duch's basic human rights may present serious problems for prosecutors should he be indicted by the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC).

"This goes directly to the heart of the Khmer Rouge Trials - and whether it's going to operate pursuant to international standards of due process and fair trial," said Jeffrey Kahan, legal adviser to the Cambodian Defenders Project....... (more in the article)

_____________________________________________

Monday, December 18, 2006
Sok An Calls for UN 'Dialogue' On KR Defense

By Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

Cabinet Minister Sok An has written to the UN asking to open a "dialogue" to resolve the acrimonious dispute over the role of the defense support section of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. This apparent return to talks after nearly a decade of tortuous political discussion to establish the Khmer Rouge tribunal has worried some observers.

In a letter dated Dec 5, Sok An said the defense section was established without proper consultation with the Cambodian government. He also took the tribunal's outspoken Principal Defender Rupert Skilbeck to task for making several "unilateral decisions" since he arrived Oct 1.

In the letter, addressed to Nicolas Michel, undersecretary general for legal affairs and legal counsel at the UN in New York, Sok An charges that the administration, role and functions of the ECCC's defense support section, as well as its relationship with the Bar Association of Cambodia, were not outlined in the agreement between Cambodia and the UN that formed the basis for the tribunal.

"[T]he concept seems to have evolved within the thinking of the UNAKRT [United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials] and staffing and budget requirements were developed without any reference to the Cambodian side," Sok An wrote.

Sok An also claimed that Skilbeck's appointment was "insufficiently attuned to the specificity of the ECCC and its position 'within the courts of Cambodia'." He added that Skilbeck has taken several decisions, including renaming the defense support unit as the defense office and disseminating information about its role, without consulting Sean Visoth, the ECCC's director of administration.

In the letter, Sok An also said that the problems with the defense support section had led to "an extremely difficult situation with a significant impact on the entire ECCC," and asked to open a dialogue directly with the UN to resolve the matter.

Sok An said he was too busy to speak with a reporter Sunday evening. Skilbeck declined to comment. Information Minister and government spokesman Khieu Kanharith could not be reached for comment. "The letter was a request by the Cambodian government for clarification on some ECCC issues," tribunal press officer Peter Foster said in an e-mailed statement. "The relevant departments are now discussing how best to address these clarifications and provide a response," he said.

One diplomat familiar with the letter questioned whether it was a stalling tactic or a genuine attempt to resolve the matter. "Is it an attempt to slow down the process or an urgent attempt to resolve this, or is it simply because the principal defender irritates the Cambodians because of his abrasive attitude in their view?" the diplomat asked. "I don't know," he added.

Others took a harder line. "It’s foot dragging," said Theary Seng, president of the Center for Social Development. "We are almost one-third of the way through the life of the court already. Money is being spent. Still we haven't touched the substantive matter."

The role of the defense support section is enshrined in the draft internal rules, which ECCC judges failed to adopt at a plenary session last month, but discussions of such a unit date back to at least December 2003.

UNAKRT officials met with Ky Tech, the president of the Cambodian Bar Association, and Sok Sam Oeun, the executive director of the Cambodian Defenders Project, in December 2003 to discuss defense counsel for the tribunal.

At that time, according to a UN report, Ky Tech said he had concerns about the capacity of Cambodian lawyers to provide an adequate defense before the ECCC and considered it a "necessity" that Cambodian defense lawyers be assisted by at least one foreign lawyer.

It was out of these and other concerns about the remuneration of foreign defense counsel that the idea for a defense support unit was born.

The 2003 agreement between Cambodia and the UN gives defendants the right to counsel of their choice and states that the UN is responsible for the remuneration of defense lawyers. In recent weeks, however, Ky Tech has refused to recognize the defense office, and warned bar members that they would break the law if they attended training that it had sponsored.

Contacted last week, Ky Tech declined to comment on the 2003 meeting.

A defendant's right to an independent and competent defense at the ECCC is a point most international observers say is non-negotiable. "This is an issue international judges could walk out over," one court observer said on condition of anonymity.

"Independent, competent defense counsel is the bedrock of international due process standards."

(Additional reporting by Prak Chan Thul)

Films at the FCC

2006-12-14T21:12:00.000+07:00

Last night saw the premier of a new short film on the Khmer Rouge period and the coming Khmer Rouge Trials. The film was produced by KID with help from OSJI- two very active NGOs in Cambodia. The English premier was at the venerable FCC and the place was packed.

The film was a very interesting and well done. It showed interviews with families from various parts of Cambodia and filmed them discussing the Khmer Rouge period. The contrast between the pain and and horror in the stories told by the grandparents, and the utter disbelief by the younger generation was shocking. In one section of the film a young man flatly denies that his mother's stories could be true because as he put it 'they don't make any sense'. He is then taken to one of the mass grave sites and his reaction to seeing the evidence of the genocide is one of the most powerful moments in the film.

The premier in Khmer will be on the 16th and 17th at the Chenla theatre in downtown Phnom Penh. It would be interesting to see the reaction from the audience, many of who, like the young man in the film, probably don't believe the stories of the Khmer Rouge.

A great job by both KID and OSJI.

On a side note: following the film a short Q&A took place. One of the questions, from a young backpacker type, was if it was true that the court had collapsed and had been cancelled. He backed up this with the 'fact' that he had been informed of the cancellation just a few hours ago. Laugher could be heard from the front rows of the audience were many members of the court including Co-Prosecutor Robert Petit, Co-Investigating Judge Marcel Lemode and a few others I didn't recognize, joked that they should go pack their bags.....

More Motoo

2006-12-14T20:59:00.000+07:00

Judge Motoo is quickly establishing himself as the most vocal of the ECCC court officials. Here his is again urging haste in finalizing the rules. Of note in this piece is his insistence on no compromise for international standards and his basic agreement with the ECCC's Cambodian spokeswoman over the complexity of combining international law and Cambodian law as the source of the delays.

Judge Moto is not the only one getting press these days however. Apparently both the International Co-Prosecutor and the International Investigating Judge have appeared on the Phnom Penh based CTN television station in the last weeks. Will the Principle Defender dare to appear as well?

Judge says Cambodian genocide tribunal urgent

HAMDEN, Connecticut: The Khmer Rouge genocide trials in Cambodia should start quickly, a judge serving on the tribunal said Wednesday, noting that many defendants, victims and witnesses are old.

"We can't dwell on this for years," Motoo Noguchi, a Japanese prosecutor who will serve as a judge for the tribunal, said at a talk at Quinnipiac University School of Law. "Now it's time to really start cases. We have to identify the disagreements and we have to make our best efforts to solve them and quickly move to the next stage."

A 2003 agreement between Cambodia and the United Nations created the tribunal after years of difficult negotiations seeking justice for crimes committed when the Khmer Rouge held power from 1975-79.

The radical policies of the now-defunct communist group led to the deaths of some 1.7 million people from execution, overwork, disease and malnutrition.

Prosecutors are expected to indict about 10 defendants, including the few surviving top Khmer Rouge leaders.

Organizers of the trials said last month they have been unable to agree on the judicial rules that will govern proceedings, but they still expect to convene the long-awaited tribunal in mid-2007.

The Cambodian and international judicial officials said last month that they had encountered "substantive disagreement" in their goal to adopt 110 draft rules for running the proceedings. The rules cover every phase of the proceedings — preliminary investigations, judicial investigations, the trial and appeals. They also delineate the roles of all parties, including prosecutors, defense attorneys and defendants. The tribunal cannot begin until they are in place.

Human Rights Watch last week accused the Cambodian government of intervening to delay adoption of the rules, a charge the government denied.

Helen Jarvis, a spokeswoman for the tribunal, has said there was no indication of political interference from the government and that the delay was due partly to the complexity of legal issues that Cambodian and foreign judicial officers are grappling with.

Noguchi offered a similar assessment, saying participants were dealing with complex international law as well as language and cultural differences.

Unlike other international tribunals, the Cambodian judges are a majority on the panel and international participants a minority, Noguchi said. Participants not from Cambodia must ensure the tribunal meets international standards, he said.

"We are not allowed to make any serious compromise on that," Noguchi said.

No new date has been set for adopting the rules.

A Million Complaints

2006-12-08T14:22:00.000+07:00

The International Co-Prosecutor may have put his foot in it with this interview where his basically invites anyone wishing to lodge a complaint to come out to the ECCC right now. I hope they have the staff in place to handle the probable bus loads of people looking to tell their story and get their moment in the court. It might take 30 years just to hear what each potential witness has to say.....

Friday, December 8, 2006
ECCC Welcomes Victims' Complaints, Risks Deluge

By Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

As the long-delayed trial of former Khmer Rouge leaders inches forward, victims of the regime from as far away as France are asking themselves how they might be a party to such belated justice.

The best answer, at the moment may be to go directly to the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia on the outskirts of Phnom Penh and talk to the prosecutor's office.

"Any victims of a crime can certainly come forward and register a complaint with the office of the co-prosecutors," co-prosecutor Robert Petit said this week. "Unfortunately, at this point, the only way to do that is for people to come here," he said.

Until the rules that govern the participation of victims and witnesses in the tribunal are adopted, Cambodian law applies, Petit said. And under Cambodian law, victims of a crime can complain personally.

If the complaint falls within the jurisdiction of the ECCC—which is empowered to prosecute senior leaders of Democratic Kampuchea and those most responsible for certain crimes committed between 1975 and 1979—the prosecutor may launch an investigation.

So far, Petit said, less than a dozen individuals have filed complaints at the court, a few of which —he declined to say exactly how many—have resulted in investigations. "Theoretically, any person who was a victim of Khmer Rouge crimes during our period has a valid complaint against those most responsible and senior leaders," he said.

This creates an obvious problem of scale. Nearly 2 million people perished during the regime of Democratic Kampuchea, and many more suffered horrendously.

Youk Chhang, director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia, said that at least half of the 4,000 people DC-Cam has interviewed in the last decade wanted to file complaints. In addition, Youk Chhang said he has a 1983 petition against the Khmer Rouge signed by 1.6 million victims, which he plans to file with the court.

About seven years ago, DC-Cam staffers asked several hundred people who signed that petition if they still wanted their complaint considered. Their answer, Youk Chhang said, was a resounding "Yes."

Petit admitted that he was unprepared for the potential deluge. Even a few thousand complaints, he said, would be impossible to respond to, much less investigate.

The office of the co-prosecutors has just three researchers and is in the process of negotiating for assistance with investigations from the Cambodian judicial police, Petit said.

Victims are potential witnesses, and Petit said that help could also come from the recently established witness support office of the ECCC and from a proposed victim's unit.

Harri Moilanen, the ECCC's new support coordinator for witnesses and experts, arrived in Phnom Penh six weeks ago. Moilanen, a Finnish national who spent nine years in the victims and witnesses section of the International Criminal Court in Yugoslavia, wrote in an e-mail that he has been working with two Cambodian colleagues to setup a witness management service, but had not yet had any dealings with victims.

Helen Jarvis, chief of public affairs at the ECCC, declined to name the two Cambodian witness support officers.

"Our policy is that certain people (such as spokespersons and judicial officers) are in the public eye, but that we do not provide personal details of other staff to the media," she wrote in an email,

The two officers were recruited through an open selection process, and all Cambodian staff application files can be reviewed by donors at any time. Jarvis did not respond to repeated requests for the budget of the witness support office.

Petit said that having just three witness support officers was "wholly insufficient."

"The NGO community could have a big impact in organizing people," he added.

Youk Chhang said that DC-Cam could help victims who are interested in filing a complaint with the ECCC.

HRW lets suspicions run wild

2006-12-06T15:18:00.000+07:00

Human Rights Watch has thrown out a challenge to the ECCC, along with some pretty serious accusations in an official statement released today. The statement is quite a read, boldly stating that, "Acting on instructions from government officials, Cambodian personnel participating in the meeting delayed adoption of the draft rules," and that "Obstructionist tactics at the meeting on the internal rules were reportedly led by ECCC prosecutor Kong Srim (Kong Srim is actually a Supreme Court Judge and not a prosecutor!), a protege of Deputy Prime Minister Sok An" and even, “The fact that the government is already obstructing the process on ‘technical’ grounds should serve as a wake-up call for donors who have chosen to ignore Cambodian realities.”

What the statement does not have however is much substance. Maybe Mr. Adams has some information or sources which he is not revealing, or maybe he just thinks that his points are so obvious that there is no need to back them up. Either way if HRW hopes to be taken seriously its going to need to come up with more than this. Everyone fears that there could be government influence but it takes more than fears , suspicions and feelings to make a case. Especially one against a court. Stay tuned. We have not heard the last of this.....

Human Rights Watch

 Donors Should Recognize How Government Tactics Threaten Entire Process

 
(New York, December 5, 2006) – The Cambodian government must end its interference in the mixed national and international tribunal set up to prosecute crimes by senior Khmer Rouge leaders and others most responsible for Khmer Rouge crimes, Human Rights Watch said today.

A recent week-long meeting of Cambodian judges and their United Nations-appointed international counterparts failed to agree on internal rules for the tribunal, which is officially known as the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC).

Acting on instructions from government officials, Cambodian personnel participating in the meeting delayed adoption of the draft rules, reversing earlier progress in the drafting process. The result is that the tribunal remains unable to launch investigations or prosecutions in accordance with international standards or even Cambodian law. 

“Adopting the internal rules is crucial to ensure that the tribunal adheres to international fair trial standards and an impartial interpretation of Cambodian law,” said Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “Many of the Khmer Rouge leaders are old and increasingly frail, but until the rules are adopted, prosecutions and trials cannot move forward.. Political interference has brought the whole process to a screeching halt.”

In comments submitted to the tribunal on November 17, Human Rights Watch called for changes to the rules to meet international fair trial standards, specifically that there would be no in absentia trials, that defense counsel would be independent and effective, and that all trials would be public. (See http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/ij/cambodia1106/.)

Cambodian lawyers and nongovernmental organizations have called for provisions to guarantee meaningful participation and protection of victims and witnesses, outreach to rural Cambodians to inform them about the trials and ensure that they can participate as civil parties, and authorization for victims’ associations and human rights NGOs to act as civil parties without having to register their organizations with the government.

Obstructionist tactics at the meeting on the internal rules were reportedly led by ECCC prosecutor Kong Srim, a protege of Deputy Prime Minister Sok An, who is Prime Minister Hun Sen’s most senior and trusted political lieutenant. As a prosecutor at the Appeals Court, Kong Srim developed a reputation for handling cases in a political manner rather than according to the law and the facts: he prosecuted suspects in absentia, played a key role in the release of Hun Sen’s nephew, Nhim Sophea, against whom there was compelling evidence of murder, and was crucial in engineering the imposition of the deputy prime minister’s candidate, Ky Tech, as president of the Cambodian Bar Association.

As documented in numerous reports by the United Nations, international legal organizations and Cambodian NGOs, the Cambodian judiciary and legal system remain under the tight control of the government. The government has ensured the appointment to the ECCC of Cambodian judges, prosecutors and security personnel who are politically loyal to the prime minister, the deputy prime minister and the national police chief, Hok Lundy. Such political control mechanisms are aimed at preventing judges and prosecutors from acting independently and conducting fair trials free from political interference.

Throughout the negotiations with the United Nations to establish the ECCC, Hun Sen and the Cambodian government engaged in a pattern of delay and obstruction, which was set out in detail by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a report to the UN General Assembly. (See UN document A/57/769, “Report of the Secretary-General on Khmer Rouge trials,” at www.un.org.) The government has long tried to bog down efforts at creating the tribunal and, now, at making it functional, through seemingly endless and often fruitless negotiations, which absorb huge amounts of time, funding and expertise, but result in little or no substantive improvements.

“Government control over the Cambodian judiciary in the Khmer Rouge tribunal has always been a grave concern,” said Adams. “The fact that the government is already obstructing the process on ‘technical’ grounds should serve as a wake-up call for donors who have chosen to ignore Cambodian realities.”

Based on past government practices, Human Rights Watch is concerned that the latest wrangling over the internal rules may be a prelude to public attacks on the tribunal’s international staff, both to drive out particular individuals and to discourage others enough to bring about their resignations.

For the past 15 years, the Cambodian government has consistently attempted to silence, dismiss or undermine UN and other international personnel in Cambodia who operate independently and professionally and are seen as a threat to the government’s continued control of the judicial system. Hun Sen has vituperatively attacked all four UN human rights special representatives to Cambodia and the UN human rights office in Phnom Penh for their consistent and well-documented reports on human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings and unfair trials, as well as the judiciary’s incompetence, corruption and lack of independence. While international donors have often called for reform of the judiciary as one of the highest priorities for Cambodia, the government has failed to adopt meaningful reforms.

“The government has long feigned accommodation with the UN system and international community in order to maintain its control over the judiciary,” said Adams. “The UN and donors must not allow this to happen this time.”

Human Rights Watch also expressed serious concern about the politically controlled Cambodian Bar Association’s attacks on the proposed ECCC Defense Office and plans for the training of Cambodian lawyers by the International Bar Association. The Cambodian Bar Association threatened legal action against Cambodian lawyers planning to attend a training on international standards by the International Bar Association in Singapore, causing it to cancel the training and to issue a strong statement condemning the move. Last year, when an independent candidate was elected president of the Cambodian Bar Association, the government-backed candidate, Ky Tech, used the politically controlled court system to have the election overturned. Ky Tech subsequently was elected as president, and it was he who ordered Cambodian lawyers not to attend the IBA training.

Though some progress has been made over the past decade, Cambodian courts generally give little respect to the right to an effective defense. The Cambodian government has repeatedly given assurances to the United Nations that arrangements would be made to allow full-fledged participation in defense by foreign lawyers, thereby ensuring that defendants would have counsel of their choosing. But the government is now obstructing this.

“The trials will not be credible unless defendants are provided a credible defense,” said Adams. “Given the well-documented problems with trials in Cambodia, the government and Bar Association should be going out of their way to ensure the reality of fair trials, rather than attacking the defense office.”

Future discussions of the internal rules will show whether it is possible for the ECCC to conduct trials that implement Cambodian and international law in an independent and impartial manner. Human Rights Watch urged both Cambodian and international personnel of the ECCC to pursue the objective of fair trials in accordance with international standards, keeping in mind that it is the Cambodian people who are the intended beneficiaries of this process.

“The international community needs to follow the Cambodian tribunal closely,” said Adams. “We want this tribunal to succeed. But if it becomes clear that the process is hopelessly politicized and obstructed, then the UN should withdraw its support to avoid becoming involved in a substandard trial that would be a disservice to itself and to millions of Cambodians.”

Show Trials

2006-12-02T17:39:00.000+07:00

Also in the Phnom Penh Post today is this letter to the editor responding to an interview with the Principal Defender in the last edition of the paper. The view here is that the process is probably doomed to failure because of the agreement- not the individuals involved. He argues that more years should be covered and the scope of possible defendants should be expanded or else it will not be a perfect system. All of this may be true. But is he really advocating going back and renegotiating for another 11 years? Is he saying that unless it is perfect they should not bother?

He then contradicts himself when he correctly points out that many former KR are now in the government and bringing them all up on charges could cause instability- and then suggests the ECCC officials are unaware of this fact. But that is exactly the reason that the courts mandate is so limited both in years covered and the level and numbers expected to be tried.

He is also critical of Mr. Skilbeck's (and many others) view that this court will serve as a model court for future reforms. He says that sudden reform will be impossible- and he is right. But have any of the court officials argued that at the end of the ECCC, the entire Cambodian system will suddenly leap 20 years ahead? If so I have never heard them say it. Reform will take time, and this court will give Cambodia something to shoot for, and some Cambodian judges a little exposure to international standards, but only that.

But he is right at the end of the letter. Better not to hold it at all, then hold something that would be seen as a failure of international standards of justice.

Hard now to avoid a KRT 'show trial'

As Rupert Skilbeck pointed out ("The Principal Defender," Post, November 17, 2006), the Khmer Rouge Trial (KRT) should not be a show trial. Of course, in the pursuit of justice this demand is really important. Unfortunately, it is only applicable to the internal design of the KRT as the result of a political bargaining process over more than ten years.

In setting the framework of the trial, many paladins of the former leaders are excluded from prosecution. Furthermore, the background of some national judges of the ECCC should raise concerns whether fairness isn't threatened through their appointment. Altogether, the fairness of the trial in pursuing justice for the Khmer Rouge's crimes is hampered already by political considerations.

The KRT is very different from its historical model, the Nuremburg trials against leading Nazis and others after the Second World War. At Nuremburg, even a non-member of the NSDAP (Nazi Party) like former German Chancellor Franz von Papen or national banker Hjalmar Schacht had to stand trial. That they were found not guilty was a good argument for the Allies that the trial was not "victors' justice." Unfortunately, figures like them are not present for the KRT, especially for the periods before April 17, 1975 and after January 7, 1979 [excluded from KRT jurisdiction]. And this also avoids examining the involvement of other states in the Khmer Rouge's crimes.

In this context it is hard to understand what Skilbeck means when he argues that if the defendants are not treated fairly "no one can ever be sure what really happened." The exclusion of many years from the trial will even ensure this fact, and for 1975-to-1978 the work of famous scholars like Chandler, Kiernan or Vickery as well as the work of several local NGOs has made it clear already that the defendants are highly politically responsible. If the initiators of the KRT were not sure that the condemnation of the former leaders of the Khmer Rouge is the next logical step it is obvious that there would not be any trial.

The KRT is an indubitable show trial: it should be shown to the Khmer people that justice is possible, and this motivation should not be questioned. But is it really the highest value while there is still the possibility of political violence and instability? It must be remembered that in giving amnesty to the former Khmer Rouge leaders it was possible to end the civil war in 1998 - after nearly 30 years of war, civil war and genocide. This peace must be protected - not only in the view of the directly involved, the Khmers -and even this causes a lack of justice.

Sometimes it seems that issues like this are not present in the perception of the international lawyers and experts. It is in doubt whether they are really sufficiently informed about Khmer culture and history.

Or how can it be explained, for example, that Skilbeck claims that the KRT can improve the legal system of Cambodia? The country's legal system is used as a tool to govern and not to ensure the rule of law or horizontal accountability. This will change only over a very long period and therefore the KRT's impact will be minimal.

And if leading members of the Royal Family should give evidence as witnesses at the trial it could be very difficult in explaining this to the Khmers who still admire King Father Sihanouk, even for the Principal Defender.

If the KRT were to fail it would be better not to conduct it, for in this case it would be a show trial, too, but very different from all the positive expectations.

Markus Karbaum - PhD Candidate, Humboldt University, Berlin

Extraordinarily troubled chambers

2006-12-02T17:11:00.000+07:00

That's the title of the latest feature on the court from the Phnom Penh Post. If you have a subscription you can see the whole article here- but here are a few highlights:

...the ECCC's precarious perch between "extraordinary" and "in the courts of Cambodia" has already been destabilized by political interference from the government, observers have told the Post. "It is a clear attempt by Hun Sen to maintain control over what is supposed to be an independent judicial process," said Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch (HRW). "Because of its deeply flawed structure and the role of government-controlled judges and prosecutors, [the ECCC] is being deeply politicized even before the first indictment is filed."...

This has been the fear of every critic, but Mr. Adams seems to want to condemn the court before it has even started. A 'clear attempt by Hen Sen to maintain control' is a pretty bold statement to make.

...."This is not an international court, it is a Cambodian court," said Ly Tayseng, secretary-general of the Cambodian Bar Association (CBA). "They cannot create another court which is fully independent from the current court system - it has to be part of the Cambodian system so as not to violate Cambodian sovereignty."....

... "This is an international tribunal based on international law," said Basil Fernando, director of the Asian Foundation for Human Rights. "It is an international court in Cambodian territory. The UN cannot agree to anything less than international standards - by its very nature it cannot."....

Here we have the problem between the Cambodian Bar and the ECCC in a nutshell. The Bar clearly has not read the agreement, or any of the statements from the government. Mr. Fernando has it correct. Why are the international officials here at all if they are not going to ensure international standards?

....ECCC officials are finding the conflicting positions difficult to reconcile, and say there is no example of it occurring in other hybrid courts elsewhere. "I have no precedent to ascertain what to do," said Robert Petit, co-prosecutor. "We have not had problems like this before - even in hybrid courts. This is completely different.".... "[These issues are] not unresolvable," Petit said. "If there is a will there is a way. If we can really delineate the basis for the arguments we can adapt."...

A little disturbing that the ECCC's own officials are not sure how to proceed- but at least they all seem to be putting on a confident front.

Hope is not a plan

2006-11-28T20:54:00.000+07:00

Today's Cambodia Daily has a follow up piece from the POV of the former Khmer Rouge. The view from the people they interviewed at least, seems to be that there will be no trial until everyone who could possibly be tried is long dead. This is one in a long line of articles from a new Daily reporter, Erika Kinetz. Rumor has it she used to work for the New York Times and is now the beat reporter for the Trials. The former KR may not believe anything will happen, in the trial but the Daily seems to have become a believer.

Nice 'sound bite' from the spokesman at the end of the piece. We better get used to that kind of statement from everyone at the ECCC during the next months. Lots of hopeful thoughts and very little detail.

KR Affiliates Not Surprised by Tribunal Holdup
Tuesday, November 28, 2006

By Thet Sambath and Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

Former Khmer Rouge soldiers and relatives of the regime's leaders said Monday that they were not surprised by the tribunal's failure this weekend to adopt crucial procedural rules, which are necessary for the trials to proceed.

Ven Ra, niece of the late Khmer Rouge military commander Ta Mok, said Saturday's development reinforced her belief that a tribunal would be impossible.

"The court's process is going too slowly," said Ven Ra, also chief of the SRP in Pailin. "It will be delayed until all former Khmer Rouge leaders die naturally," she said.

The rules, which were slated to be approved on Saturday, govern the roles of judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, victims, suspects and witnesses in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. Their adoption was delayed due largely to a split over how to integrate Cambodian and international law, tribunal officials said. ECCC officials have said they anticipate that first indictments could still be handed down early next year.

Ieng Vuth, deputy governor of Pailin municipality and son of former Khmer Rouge foreign minister Ieng Sary, said the tribunal should not go ahead until both sides are in agreement.

"Let [the two sides] discuss among themselves until they understand each other," recommended Ieng Vuth, whose father has been fingered by some observers as a potential candidate for prosecution. "Untac did not understand the Khmer and forced us [to join the national election in 1993] and then we had a war again."

Lath Nhoung, a former Khmer Rouge soldier, also said he did not believe the trial will ever happen. "The court's process is to show international that they are working to try [the Khmer Rouge leaders], but actually they will delay the process until they all die," he claimed.

ECCC spokesman Peter Foster said both sides of the court are committed to adopting a set of rules that respects Cambodian law and meets international standards. "We would not be here if this was going to be nothing but a 'show trial,'" Foster said. "The expectation of the donors and the mandate of the court is to ensure this process meets international standards of justice from beginning to end," he said.

Secret Plots

2006-11-27T19:14:00.000+07:00

Here is the first of what will likely be many accusations that the hand of the government may be involved in the failure of the court to adopt its rules last week. A story entitled Hen Sen's Hand in the Trial Delays? speculates that there may be more to the Cambodian Bar's actions that just a demand for the removal of the ECCC's Defence Support Office, some highlights;

...objections to the IBA's involvement in the Cambodian tribunal has given rise to speculation that Ky Tech's motives may not be his alone, or that of the CBA. After all, the country's justice system is known for its questionable record on upholding human rights, being heavily politicised and even accused of corruption.

‘'The CBA president has become vocal to a degree that it is hard to believe that he is saying these things without political backing,'' Theary Seng, executive director of the Centre for Social Development (CSD), a non-governmental organisation (NGO), said in a telephone interview from Phnom Penh. ‘'It seems to be aimed to either slow the process, or even stall it. This is worrying.''

Cambodian human rights groups are equally alarmed, more so because they are aware of who Ky Tech's political patrons are. ‘'There can be some political influence behind this statement,'' Ny Chakrya, a ranking member of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association, a Phnom Penh-based NGO, told IPS. ‘'Some CBA lawyers work closely with the CPP (Cambodian People's Party). Ky Tech is pro-CPP.''

No suprise that the NGOs are sounding the alarm bell, and no question that much of the Cambodian Bar is made up of CPP party members. This is probably one of the main reasons why the formation of an independent Defence office of the ECCC was so important to the UN.

....Such allegations directed at the governing CPP, led by Prime Minister Hun Sen, are not the first pointing to its attempts to scupper a legal process that Cambodian civilians have been yearning for. The increasingly authoritarian Hun Sen has been a serial opponent of the special tribunal ever since the United Nations began talks with the Phnom Penh regime over a decade ago to create the ECCC.

Hun Sen's sensitivity towards the ECCC was on display in May, when he lashed out at human rights groups who called into question Cambodia's choice of judges to sit on a tribunal that stands out -- unlike the ones for Rwanda and former Yugoslavia -- in having a combination of local and international jurists to be part of the entire legal process.

He ‘'likened his critics to perverted sex-crazed animals, among other things,'' the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission, a regional rights lobby, said on the occasion. Human rights groups were not happy at the choice of Ney Thol, an army general and president of Cambodia's military court, being among the 17 local jurists for the ECCC. He has a record of denying the right for lawyers of the accused to call their own witnesses and to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses

This sort of mixes up a few of Hun Sen's quotes- not all of which were even directed at the ECCC. In fact Hen Sen, despite his frequent rants and questionable decisions (banning 3G phones for 10 years to save the morality of the nation?), was one of the ones to ask the UN to come and get involved in this process in the first place. There is even a statement of support from Hun Sen in the opening of the ECCC information booklet. But the PM has certainly kept his distance from the court since it opened.

What is more, a question still hangs in the air over Hun Sen if his name is dragged into the tribunal's proceedings, which formally got underway this year after years of delay. He was a member of the Khmer Rouge till he defected to join forces with the Vietnamese troops that drove out Pol Pot, the leader of that brutal regime, from power in 1979.

Well this certainly is a question to consider. I am not sure if Hen Sen has ever been mentioned as a 'senior leader' or 'most responsible', but he was probably high enough in rank to end up as a witness of some kind. Still if the ECCC is serious about getting '5-10' people prosecuted, it will probably have to stick to cases that do not involve the PM- at least for now. But as the Co-Prosecutors keep saying, they will follow the evidence where ever it takes them....

Bad Judgment

2006-11-25T13:29:00.000+07:00

Here it is. The result of tens of thousands of dollars spent and a weeks worth of meetings. A two page statement pledging.... to have more meetings. They point out some of the areas of pretty serious disagreement, but don't bother trying to find any words about areas were they agreed in this statement.

JOINT STATEMENT BY NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL OFFICERS of the ECCC

Phnom Penh, 25 November 2006

We wish to acknowledge above all the importance of these proceedings for the people of Cambodia. We also understand the heavy responsibility we have to do our utmost to move forward with this important work.

As national and international judicial officers we have met in Plenary Session over the past six days. All of us have a strong determination to succeed in our goal of establishing a firm foundation for the court. No one wishes to delay these long-awaited trials.

Nevertheless, we regret to announce that we have been unable to complete our task of adopting Internal Rules for the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.

The rules we have been working on are necessary as they will provide the procedural underpinning required for every phase of the proceedings – from preliminary investigation, to judicial investigation, to trial and through appeal. They also delineate the roles of all parties, the co-prosecutors, defence and victims.

The Draft we considered had over 110 rules with hundreds of sub-rules. These draft rules were posted on our website and submissions were invited. We received numerous comments and suggestions from NGOs, legal scholars and other interested observers from across the world.

During this Plenary Session we discussed general matters and had time to focus in detail on about a third of these Draft Rules. We have come to realise that the task we were given to achieve in one week was far too ambitious.

We have also become aware that we have some basic differences. In particular, we have found that we currently have substantive disagreement about several key issues. Amongst these are:
How to integrate Cambodian law and international standards;
The role of the Defence Support Unit including the issue of how defence lawyers will be qualified;
The role of the Co-Prosecutors and its impact on the voting procedure;
How the Extraordinary court will operate within the Cambodian court structure.
Additionally we have not had an adequate opportunity to address in detail some of the vital issues before the court, in particular the role of victims and civil party rights.

A committee will continue to work between now and the next Plenary Session in an effort to find a path toward resolving the differences.

Although this continues to be a challenging process, all judicial officers are determined to do our best to resolve these issues, if at all possible. We recognise how important our work is in bringing justice to the Cambodian people for crimes committed almost thirty years ago in order to help to continue the process of ensuring social harmony.

The End of the Line

2006-11-24T22:37:00.000+07:00

Well the word is out and the press conference planned for Saturday has been cancelled. Apparently a statement of some kind will be issued instead.

That makes it pretty clear that the problem between the international and national judges went far beyond defence issues. For them to cancel a day before the conference, knowing that press may have flown in just for the opportunity to pose questions to the judges, must mean things are pretty desperate.

Tomorrow's statement should be a very interesting read.

More Arguments

2006-11-23T18:33:00.000+07:00

This should give everyone a good flavour of the tense atmosphere that must be in the room this week. From the Cambodia Daily;

Bar Threatens Lawyers Over ECCC Training

By Erika Kinetz and Prak Chan Thul
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

The president of the Cambodian Bar Association on Wednesday threatened to take legal action against anyone who participates in a five-day training course on international criminal law that is being offered by the Defense Office of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the International Bar Association. "We are being violated by the foreign lawyers," Cambodian Bar Association President Ky Tech said in an interview.

He said the legal training violated Cambodian law and he described Cambodian lawyers who have cooperated with foreigners in setting up the training as ''extremists." "We will have measures against lawyers who have conspired to violate the law," Ky Tech warned. His remarks mark an escalation of a growing turf war between the Cambodian Bar Association and the Defense Office of the ECCC.

Tough words- hardly a spirit of cooperation and friendship. And difficult to understand how training courses could be a violation of Cambodian Law. But comments like these make critics of the Court even more confident in their decisions not to back it. This from the US Ambassador;

The virulence of the debate has caught the attention of the US government which has not yet funded the tribunal but may do so. The US Congress has been reluctant to allow funding for the tribunal, on the grounds that it might not measure up to international standards of justice. "We have concerns about the virulence of some of the comments by the Cambodian Bar Association," US Ambassador Joseph Mussomeli said Wednesday. "We know the bar president has connections to the government," Mussomeli said. "It's worrying since he has spoken in such a strident manner. As we work to find ways to fund directly the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, these sort of comments are not helpful.

And this comment from the Public Affairs Officer has "we are in trouble but don't want to talk about it", written all over it;

Peter Foster, public affairs officer at the ECCC, said the exact relationship between the bar and the principle defender's office, including issues relevant to the now controversial training session, were being discussed at the plenary session of the ECCC. The session was convened Monday to ratify the court's internal rules. Those rules govern the roles of judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, suspects and witnesses appearing in the trials. The bar association, he added, has been invited back to the plenary session today for continued discussion. He declined to comment further on the controversy.

The true measure of the problems will probably be evident by what happens on Saturday. There is a joint press conference planned to announce the final rules. If that is cancelled or changed we will know how bad things really are.

Quite a change from the positive meetings held in July.

Its all good

2006-11-22T22:53:00.000+07:00

Some optimistic news from a visiting US university professor. Its good to hear some positive news about the trial, but his assumptions seem a tad too optimistic. The quote from Eng Chhay Eang seems more realistic when he warns that "the trial could be subjected to political influences'. That could certainly be source of the conflict reportedly taking place at the judicial meetings this week.

Illinois Professor Claims Khmer Rouge Trial is Incorruptible
Chun Sakada
VOA Khmer
Washington
21/11/2006

A U.S. university professor expresses confidence in Cambodia's judges, and believed that they will not be swayed by political influence and corruption in the trial of former Khmer Rouge leaders

Speaking to reporters at the U.S. Embassy in Phnom Penh, Dr. Steven D. Roper, associate professor at the Department of Political Science of Eastern Illinois University, says that "no one is going to be able to bribe the Cambodian judges".

Cambodian judges and prosecutors in the Extraordinary Chambers of Cambodia have been criticized for being incompetent and bias towards the ruling party.

Opposition party legislator Eng Chhay Eang agrees that this trial will not become corrupted, but admitted that the trial could be subjected to political influences. "The judges and the prosecutors were [only] selected to be within a political framework", said Eng Chhay.

Cambodia Center for Human Rights' (CCHR) director Kem Sokha says that the trial might be more politically inclined than be unfair, due to corruption.

The Khmer Rouge regime was blamed for the death of an estimated 1.7 million Cambodians between 1975-1979.

The U.S. says that it will not contribute to funding the Khmer Rouge Trial, unless the tribunal meets international standards.

The trial is expected to last 3 years and will likely cost more than $56 millions. The Khmer Rouge tribunal is expected to start in 2007.

Is the Court About to Collapse??

2006-11-22T18:13:00.000+07:00

Could be.

According to some well informed sources the Plenary session ended in chaos today when the senior international Judge, S. Cartwright, circulated a letter to all the Cambodian judges on behalf of all the international judges. The letter accused the Cambodians of refusing to respect international standards and of refusing to work with their international colleagues. Worse, the letter threatened to inform the UN that further progress was not possible and that the UN should withdraw its funds and staff from the process. Unknown if this 'letter' is going to be released to the press- but if true, it could signal the total collapse of the court.

What a tragedy for the people of Cambodia. Let's hope they can resolve things before its too late.

All Quiet

2006-11-21T20:23:00.000+07:00

No news from the court officials conference, but plenty of rumours flying around.

Word has it that the NGO community was none too happy about the Cambodian Bar Association being included and taking up time in their presentation period on Monday- especially since they were taking opposing positions to the NGOs on defence issues. Word also has it that the mood in the conference from the Cambodian judges is not too welcoming towards the Principle Defender either. With the Bar Association and the Cambodian judges all rumoured to have connections to the ruling CPP, talk is bound to be about the start of long feared political influence being applied.

Barely a mention in the Daily. The South Korean visit, and the rather bazaar request for Cambodia to mediate between North and South Korea, appears to have drawn all the press attention this week.

A picture tells a thousand words

2006-11-20T14:27:00.000+07:00

The UNAKRT site seems to have decided to head off any critics of the detention center by posting a photo of it on the site. Take a look here and see if you think its like a 150.00 a night hotel (as was reported in some local press)!

Global Policy Forum

2006-11-20T14:13:00.000+07:00

There was a very good article on the court published in LeMonde in October. Global Policy Forum has the English translation now posted on its site, along with quite a few other background articles on the court going back to 2004. Check it out.

BBC News

2006-11-20T14:01:00.000+07:00

BBC Online has a nice little piece on this weeks court officials meeting. There was also a radio story on the 1200 news on BBC 1000 in Phnom Penh, though I have not been able to find a link to the audio file just yet.

Officials mull Khmer Rouge trials
Cambodian and international judges are meeting to discuss the rules to be applied during the trials of the former leaders of the Khmer Rouge.
The session, planned to last a week, has been preceded by discussions over the role of foreign lawyers and public participation in the process.
The issue of whether the defendants can get a fair trial has also been debated.
About two million people died during the years that the Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia in the 1970s under Pol Pot.

Which of the former Khmer Rouge leaders will be prosecuted first may be announced before the end of the year.
The UN-backed trials are due to start in 2007, and could mean that surviving leaders of the brutal Maoist regime - some of whom are still living freely - will be called to the dock.
Defendants vilified
The Khmer Rouge trials process started four months ago, but Cambodian and international legal officials still have to agree on many of the procedures for the trials.
Differences in legal systems have to be addressed - not just between local and international laws, but among the various legal codes used by the international officials.
Already the draft rules have been criticised. Human rights groups have warned that the trials could be swamped by a flood of lawsuits from members of the public.

The Cambodian Bar Association has said it will try to block foreign lawyers from representing defendants.
And the principal defender has raised doubts over whether a fair trial is possible for men who have been vilified publicly for more than two decades.
The international co-prosecutor, Robert Petit, says compromise is the only solution.
"We have to adapt the law to our mandate. We have a three year budget, we have some very specific crimes that are by nature extremely complex and difficult to deal with, and we have to adapt those rules and that law so that we can fulfil that mandate," Mr Petit said.
The Pol Pot regime saw up to two million people executed or starved or overworked to death between 1975 and 1979.
Pol Pot, the founder and leader of the Khmer Rouge, died in a camp along the border with Thailand in 1998.
Other key figures have also died. Ta Mok - the regime's military commander and one of Pol Pot's most ruthless henchmen - died on 21 July 2006.
The BBC's Guy De Launey in Phnom Penh says this week's meeting could go a long way to making sure the Khmer Rouge Trials are meaningful to the survivors.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/6164262.stm

Opening Day

2006-11-19T20:12:00.000+07:00

The ECCC judges have all arrived in town and are staying in the Raffles Hotel. Sounds like a nice way to spend a week but I am sure they will have a very difficult time finalizing the internal rules to have any time to enjoy the hotel- or the city. One newcomer to the group will be Judge Cartwright from New Zealand, who was not present during the original swearing-in ceremony back in July. It will be interesting to see if they decide to give her a public swearing-in ceremony as part of the week's events.

The press have been invited to attend the opening session on Monday and civil society groups have been asked to give their input on the draft internal rules on Monday afternoon. The afternoon session should be the one with the fireworks as among the groups invited to give input is the Cambodian bar.

Don't let me be misunderstood

2006-11-19T16:36:00.000+07:00

Another article on the court this time from AFP appears to be a result of the same interview which resulted in the story from the Cambodia Daily which I talked about in the Court Eats its Own post below. AFP seemed to have picked up a different message however, with the complaints from court officials being squarely focused on the lack of funds for outreach, rather than the efforts of the Public Affairs office up to this point.

More interesting are the comments from DC CAM's Youk Chhang who suggests that most people in Cambodia could not really care less about how the court works, all they want to hear about is who is going to be prosecuted and when. That is probably an observation that applies beyond Cambodia as well. Outside of legal researchers and historians, few are going to care much about procedures and rules, no matter how unique or how important they are. Who is going to be prosecuted and when will it happen? Those are the questions that the Court Officials will have to deal with every time they step out of their offices.

KRouge tribunal misunderstood, officials say
By Seth Meixner

PHNOM PENH (AFP) - Debate begins this week on internal rules to shape Cambodia's Khmer Rouge trials, but some fear the tribunal's efforts are being undermined by a misunderstanding of what the court seeks to do.

Foreign judges Monday will begin discussing with their Cambodian counterparts the more than 100 tribunal regulations seeking to find common ground between varied legal codes.

The adoption of this procedural framework, expected at the end of the week, will take the tribunal a significant step forward, officials say. "It's a road map for everybody. Without these rules the court cannot function properly," said tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath.

But the man who will prosecute one of the 20th century's worst genocides said the trial on which Cambodia has pinned so many of its hopes for reconciliation is misunderstood by those it is meant to serve. "We haven't done a good job of telling people there is a mountain of evidence and about the way we get through it," Robert Petit, one of two tribunal co-prosecutors, said in an interview last week. "Obviously there is a need for better information sharing," he said.

He said that not enough money or effort had been spent on outreach programs explaining the complex court procedure to the Cambodian public, putting the tribunal's credibility at risk.

"If the court isn't understood by the general public, it will fail," added co-investigating judge Marcel Lemonde, saying discussions were underway to organise monthly update briefings.

But lessons on dry legal procedure would likely be lost on many Cambodian villagers, who are concerned less about jurisprudence and more that "people are indicted and leaders arrested," said genocide researcher Youk Chhang.

"The public's expectations will be completely different than the court's delivery," Youk Chhang, director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia which has been compiling evidence against regime leaders, told AFP. "The public expects the trial to begin soon. ... They don't care about how you handle a case. They want a final judgement," he added.

As many as 10 former Khmer Rouge leaders are expected to be called to the dock over the apocalypse that engulfed Cambodia in the late 1970s.

The communist regime turned the already war-battered country into a vast collective farm between 1975 and 1979 in its drive for an agrarian utopia, forcing millions into the countryside. Up to two million people died of starvation, overwork and from executions during the four-year rule of the Khmer Rouge, which abolished religion, property rights, currency and schools.

Prosecutors in the three-year, joint UN-Cambodian tribunal are expected to hand up the names of potential defendants to an investigating judge by the end of the year.

Trials are expected to start in mid-2007, but Youk Chhang said there is a growing feeling among Cambodians that the tribunal is being done less for their benefit and more to raise the profile of its international backers.

"It is important right now that this process is accepted by the victims -- that they feel ownership," he said. "If (tribunal staff) do their job and concentrate, meet their deadlines, it should be okay," he said.

Lost Republic

2006-11-19T16:10:00.000+07:00

Details are Sketchy has a nice find from the New Republic which I have reposted below. The author of the New Republic blog is actually the Editor-in-Chief of the publication which makes his comments even more inexcusable. Basic research does not seem to worry Mr. Peretz. Not surprisingly, there is no way to contact him directly and point out the errors in his blog, but you can contact the assistant editor Mr. Parker at: (rparker@tnr.com) and let him know the correct spelling of Khmer....

Clueless in Washington

November 18th, 2006

Martin Peretz of The New Republic has this to say about the Khmer Rouge Tribunals.

Cambodia is finally trying some Khymer Rouge officials in a combination of a court and truth and reconciliation process. My guess is that many, if not most of the Khymer are dead. And, as for their Cambodian victims, aside from the rough million or more they actually murdered, large numbers of them will also have died.

In addition to the completely asinine spelling of “Khmer,” Peretz is wrong on just about every account. So wrong, in fact, that it quickly becomes obvious that he has no idea what he is talking about.

There is no truth and reconciliation process. The cynical would argue that, at least at this point, there is not even an agreed set of rules for the court to work by. And while Peretz may be right when he says that some Khmer Rouge leaders are now dead, it’s also correct to say that many are not. Much the same can be said for the KR’s victims — while many have died, there are literally millions still living — as anyone who possesses even the most superficial understanding of the country could point out.

The principal defender

2006-11-17T21:10:00.001+07:00

This is a long interview published in the Phnom Penh Post. The Principle Defender seems to be dominating the news these days. It is very long so I will only post a few highlights- but you can read the whole thing on KI media here:

The principal defender
Phnom Penh Post, Issue 15 / 23, November 17 - 30, 2006

....Rhetorically speaking, could a judge who was a victim of the Khmer Rouge be impartial or would this constitute a conflict of interest?

International law states that for justice to be done, justice must be seen to be done. Judges must be both impartial and independent. Independence means that they must be absolutely free from political influence, both in the way that they are appointed and also in the way that they are removed. For a judge to be impartial, international law states that the appearance of impartiality is important. Judges have been removed before for writing books about defendants where they suggest that they are guilty, for being on the committee of an NGO that was involved in the case and for having a close friendship with the prosecutor. It is likely that the question of whether a judge who was a victim of the Khmer Rouge can be impartial is going to be a significant legal question that will be raised by the defense before the ECCC.
....

Is it possible for war crimes tribunals such as the ECCC to provide fair trials for defendants?

It is important to remember that any defendant is presumed innocent until and unless the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty. There have been acquittals at all previous war crimes tribunals, and there is no reason to think that that will not occur in the ECCC. If defendants are not tried in an overtly fair way, then no one can ever be sure what really happened, and the whole purpose of the court is wasted. Alternatively, we can have show trials.
....

How important are witness protection schemes for the integrity of the ECCC?

It is absolutely fundamental that there must be a full witness protection program for prosecution and defense witnesses. This needs expertise, training, financial and political support. Without this, trials cannot be fair.

What do you think the nature of the ECCC trials will be?

If the prosecutors restrict themselves to bringing cases against only the senior leaders of the Khmer Rouge, then the process before the ECCC is going to be much more like a truth commission than the adversarial trials of other war crimes tribunals.

Where the defendants are all elderly, any potential sentences will be life sentences, no matter what offences they may be convicted of.

Under the investigative system of justice, there is much more of a concept of a "search for the truth" than in the adversarial system, which is more concerned with "Can they prove it?" For many, the prime objective of the ECCC, for witnesses and defendants alike, is to be able to explain in public what happened to Cambodia. This also means that the ECCC is likely to ask the question "Why did it happen?" which is not normally something that concerns an adversarial trial.

The Lawyers are suing

2006-11-17T20:56:00.000+07:00

Well that didn't take long.

The Cambodian Bar is apparently not happy at all with the Draft Internal Rules of the court or with the Principle Defender Rupert Skilbeck. In fact, they have released their comments on the draft rules which really amount to a flat out threat to sue Mr. Skilbeck and the ECCC unless they get their way.

Make no mistake, if the Cambodian Bar carries through with this threat it could make things very difficult indeed for the court to make any further progress. The court is holding an meeting at the Cambodian Japanese Friendship Center (?) all next week to finilize the rules of the court, the Bar Association along with everyone else will be anxiously waiting to see what they come up with.

No pressure guys..... no pressure at all.....

Cambodia's Bar Association threatens to derail Khmer Rouge tribunal

PHNOM PENH (AFP) - Cambodia's Bar Association has demanded greater control over the legal defence of former Khmer Rouge leaders and has threatened to block foreign attorneys from participating in a tribunal to try top regime cadre.

In a scathing statement sent to tribunal staff obtained Friday by AFP, the association said draft internal regulations that would determine how the tribunal operates violate Cambodian law.

At the core of the Bar's complaints is the provision giving foreign lawyers the right to defend Cambodian clients.

Under the current proposed regulations, "lawyers admitted to practice outside of Cambodia shall work in conjunction with a lawyer admitted in Cambodia, as co-lawyers, with equal rights of audience".

Association president Ky Tech said that only the Bar can approve the list of defence attorneys for former Khmer Rouge suspects, oversee their training and mete out discipline.

The Bar has also said it would not approve any foreign lawyers whose home countries did not give Cambodian attorneys reciprocal rights to practice law.

Ky Tech said he would sue the tribunal -- known as the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia -- as well as the government and foreign bar associations if his organisation's demands were not met.

"Foreigners cannot represent clients. They can only accompany Cambodian lawyers," Ky Tech said in the Bar's statement.

"Foreign lawyers must be accepted beforehand by the Bar Association ... these regulations do not abide by Cambodian law," he added.

The Bar also objects to the Defence Office, established to protect the rights of the accused, and said it should be headed by a Cambodian rather than a foreigner.

British lawyer Rupert Skilbeck is currently the principal defender in the office.

A three-year, joint UN-Cambodian tribunal to prosecute crimes committed during the 1975-79 Khmer Rouge regime got underway in July, with co-prosecutors expected to hand up the names of potential defendants to an investigating judge by the end of the year.

Trials are expected to start in mid-2007, and as many as 10 former leaders could be called to the court over the deaths of up to two million people during the Khmer Rouge's four-year rule.

So far no foreign lawyers have applied to act as defence counsel. Only Jacques Verges, the radical French lawyer who defended Nazi Klaus Barbie and the terrorist Carlos the Jackal, has expressed interest in participating.

Verges reportedly met with Khieu Samphan, the head of state during the Khmer Rouge regime, earlier this year to discuss possibly defending the former cadre if he is indicted.

The two had first met in Paris as students during the 1950s.

Debate has raged over how to include Cambodian lawyers, who have a reputation as being notoriously inept and corrupt, in the tribunal.

Few, if any, have international trial experience and are unlikely to be able to match foreign attorneys in skill, critics argue.

DC CAM on Air

2006-11-16T23:22:00.001+07:00

The director of DC CAM, Youk Chhang was on Asia Pacific radio this week talking about the tribunal. DC CAM has had a love-hate relationship with the court over the last months, but in this interview Mr. Chhang seems to have struck a good balance between his role as an NGO and the courts role.

Anyone who has read the latest edition of TIME Asia will recognize Youk Chhang as one of the 'Asian Hero's' in this weeks edition. He certainly deserves much credit for his work in keeping and gathering the KR records all these years.

CAMBODIA: Khmer Rouge trials enters crucial phase.

In Cambodia, the effort to bring to account the surviving leaders of the murderous Khmer Rouge regime has entered a crucial phase. Years of documentation and research is being turned into evidence by prosecutors, building a case against those responsible for the deaths of an estimated two million Cambodians.

Listen | Audio Help

Presenter/Interviewer: Tom Fayle
Speakers: Tuol Sleng, guide; Youk Chhang, director of Documentation Centre of Cambodia

FAYLE: The chatter of birds in the grounds of the former Phnom Penh high school now known as Tuol Sleng. Thousands of people from all walks of life were brought here from all over the country. Held in miserable conditions - often for months - they were tortured, taken to the killing fields and executed, only a handful are known to have survived.

Everyone, as they say in Cambodia, is a victim, with a quarter of the population perishing in often terrible circumstances in the three years, eight months and 20 days the Khmer Rouge held power in the latter half of 1970s

Now, nearly three decades on, the building blocks for the mixed Cambodian - international court are in place and the detail of just how the trials will be conducted is being thrashed out. A more than 80-page draft of the court's internal rules has recently been released for public comment.

CHHANG: Right now it's a crucial stage for the investiagtion and I think the office of the prosecutors have been very active, they've been working very hard. Not just with us but also with other civil societies and other individuals in terms of gathering information for evidence and hopefully that it can turn the evidence to become a legal case.

FAYLE: Youk Chhang is the director of Documentation Centre of Cambodia, which for years has been in the forefront of preserving the history of the genocide. Agreement to hold the special United Nations-backed Khmer Rouge tribunal took years of tortuous negotiation…but even today, it's still not clear whether the indictments will be limited to a few high profile leaders of the former regime or the net will be spread more widely.

CHHANG: This is the job of the co-prosecutor. We shall give them some time on this issue. And I think also it would be unfair for us to point a finger at certain individuals at this stage.

FAYLE: You've been studying this issue for years and so have many others. You must have an idea as to who you think is going to be in the frame when the time comes.

CHHANG: Well I know who these people are. I know who's the driver, who's the clerk, who's the chief of unit but you know I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a co-prosecutor so it's not my role to say this or that should be prosecuted. But we have that information which has also been available to co-prosecutors in the last several months and we've been supplying all kinds of information, photos, documents, sounds, you name it, location of massacre. So it's up to them to decide who among these people should be prosecuted.

FAYLE: Give me your best guess as to when you think proceedings will kick off.

CHHANG: I think it's too soon to say January 2007 but i think between April and June because they need a couple of months to settle down between the investigator and the co-prosecutors. So I hope maybe April or June 2007.

FAYLE; The process is expected to cost well over 50 million US dollars and some question the usefulness of the exercise, arguing that while it may be a preoccupation of ngo groups and international lawyers the bulk of Cambodia's young population now has other priorities.

Tribunal's Justice and Judicial Legacy At Odds

2006-11-16T17:13:00.000+07:00

Tribunal's Justice and Judicial Legacy At Odds

Thursday, November 16, 2006

News Analysis
By Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

By now, with the heaps of scholarly work conducted on candidates for the prosecution, everyone knows these guys— the ailing and yet-to-be-named top leaders of the Democratic Kampuchea regime— are guilty, right?

Even as the nitty-gritty work of picking through the draft internal rules of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia proceeds—public comments are due Friday—it is clear that the challenges the tribunal faces are deeper than the 113 proposed rules can address. They are cultural, historical, political and existential. And they are not unique to Cambodia.

Perhaps the deepest issue is the fact that the drive for historical reckoning is, in some respects, at odds with the judicial legacy many hope the Khmer Rouge tribunal will leave Cambodia.

This is a fairly common problem at such courts. But it may be of particular import in Cambodia, where some have argued that the ancillary benefits of the tribunal— a fuller historical record and a more robust rule of law—may be more significant than forcing a few old men to live out the slim remainder of their days in prison.

Rupert Skilbeck, the tribunal's chief defense coordinator, speaking Monday at a conference on the rights of the accused, cited numerous examples from other international criminal tribunals where there was friction between the requirement of judicial propriety and the thirst for historical justice.

Problem one, Skilbeck said, is the presumption of innocence. By now, with the heaps of scholarly work conducted on candidates for the prosecution, everyone knows these guys—the ailing and yet-to-be-named top leaders of the Democratic Kampuchea regime —are guilty, right'

The former leaders of the former Yugoslavia had it bad, too.

Skilbeck said that at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, "Most Wanted" posters of indictees were hung liberally around the court's offices. After each arrest, people would mark a big red X over that person's face.

Nuremberg, he continued, was an inauspicious start to the history of international defense law. All the defense lawyers were members of the Nazi party, whom the German Bar Association accused of defending their clients too vigorously.

"The worst offender," Skilbeck added, "is the Secretary-General of the United Nations [Kofi Annan], who recently stated that Charles Taylor is a war criminal. Charles Taylor is not a war criminal unless and until he can be found guilty."

Taylor, the detained former president of Liberia, is accused of war crimes in Sierra Leone. His trial at the International Criminal Court in the Hague is set to begin in April.

Many have argued that the enormous pressure judges on war crimes courts face to convict means that the first principle of international criminal justice is often inverted. The accused must prove their innocence. Guilty verdicts, the argument goes, reassure donors their money has been well spent and satisfy victims' thirst for retribution.

This, according to Sok Sam Oeun, executive director of the Cambodian Defenders Project, is dangerously close to one of the most troubling practices of the very Cambodian courts many observers hope the ECCC will improve on. In practice, he said, the accused is often asked in a Cambodian court if he has enough evidence to prove his innocence.

"We cannot underestimate the importance of having a strong defense," said Richard Rogers, the deputy principal defender at the ECCC.

That is easier said than done.

Mounting a coherent defense in international criminal courts is difficult. And it is not only defense lawyers who argue that the fairness of a trial hinges on defendants' rights. The UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, for example, enshrines the rights of the accused.

Provisions guaranteeing the rights of defendants were one of the prerequisites for UN involvement in the ECCC, according to "The Khmer Rouge Tribunal" a collection of essays recently published by the Documentation Center of Cambodia. And the ECCC has budgeted almost $4.8 million for defense council fees, which Skilbeck said was part of an attempt to avoid inequities in the strength of the prosecution versus the defense that have plagued other international criminal courts.

There are other barriers besides money that threaten to undermine the strength of the defense. Corruption is one. At the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda, Skilbeck said, defense lawyers were subject to a fee-splitting arrangement where they had to give kickbacks to the defendant's family.

"The client chooses a lawyer on the condition that the lawyer pays a portion of his fee back to the client’s family," Skilbeck said. "It was fairly established practice in Rwanda. That isn’t allowed. There will have to be measures within the ECCC to ensure that doesn’t happen."

International relations are another common source of friction, he said, and the rumblings of a turf war between Cambodian attorneys and their international colleagues can already be heard.

For one thing, Skilbeck's mandate is unclear, a point Cambodian attorneys in the audience at Monday's conference did not hesitate to point out. His office is not enshrined by the ECCC law, but by the draft internal rules of the court that are currently under consideration.

"Strictly speaking, I don’t legally exist at the moment" Skilbeck acknowledged.

Moreover, he is not authorized to practice as a lawyer in Cambodia. No foreign lawyer is right now.

"So far we have not received any applications for foreign lawyers to practice in Cambodia," Ly Tayseng, secretary-general of the Cambodian Bar Association, told Skilbeck at Monday's meeting.

"Maybe you should be the first one," he added. Skilbeck smiled in response.

Given the hurdles the ECCC defense office predicts Cambodian lawyers will face before the court, cooperation may be key to justice. Skilbeck said he envisioned defense teams composed of local and international attorneys.

"The EC is technically within the Cambodian system, but there are so many differences it will seem like a different jurisdiction,'' Rogers said It will likely be the first time many Cambodian attorneys have used international criminal law, he added.

Qualifications for defense lawyers are under discussion as well. Whether Cambodian defenders will have to have experience in criminal cases, for example, before cutting their teeth on a complex genocide trial remains to be seen.

A few details show the differences clearly: The average Cambodian trial lasts 10 to 20 minutes, there may or may not be any live witnesses, and the presentation of documentary evidence is the exception rather than the rule, according to Sok Sam Oeun and Rogers.

In contrast the UN side of the ECCC has allotted $332,300 for expert witnesses and $110,100 for an expected 150 witnesses for the prosecution and the defense. Skilbeck said the court has budgeted for a six-month trial.

The stated function of the defense office and its 15 proposed staffers is to help address those challenges by offering administrative and legal support as well as training. But it was far from clear on Monday how welcome that help would be. Several of the Cambodian attorneys present made loud protests in the name of national sovereignty.

"We have the competency to work on the Khmer Rouge Tribunal," said Kang Rithkiry, an attorney with the Asean International Law Group, adding that "the bar association can take care of the lawyers."

Some, including historian Steve Heder, have argued that only a fair trial that hews to the text of the law will be able to deliver to the Cambodian people valuable information not just about what happened during the regime of Democratic Kampuchea but also why.

In the ECCC, much of the work is being done now, in the private, pre-trial phase. Like other major international criminal courts, the ECCC will focus only on senior leaders and people most responsible for the horrors inflicted on the Cambodian people from 1975 to 1979. Popular demands for more far-reaching justice were met in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia with trials by national courts and in Sierra Leone and East Timor by truth and reconciliation commissions. No comparable mechanism exists in Cambodia at the moment, and observers say it’s unlikely that one will be established.

Thus, how—and how well—the court will serve the public remains to be seen.

The trial chamber at the ECCC, which may well be modified, is at the moment an impressive half-moon-shaped, 500-seat theater, based, according to Skilbeck, on the design of the Chaktomuk Theater, the site of the 1979 trial in absentia of Pol Pot and former Khmer Rouge foreign minister Ieng Sary, which many dismiss as a show trial.

"It’s a theater for a trial," Skilbeck said of the ECCC site.

"If you're trying to make it look like a show trial, you put it in a theater like that," he added.

Most international tribunals, he said, have about three people in the audience.

"International criminal trials are actually quite boring," he said, adding that he hoped there would be some architectural adjustments to the trial chamber to ensure that the proceedings would not be overly intimidating for defendants.

But here in Cambodia, there is a hunger for publicity about the tribunal that neither the public affairs office of the ECCC nor a mere 500-seat theater seems able to satisfy.

Ang Udom, a Cambodian attorney who attended Monday's meeting, argued that even the defendants might enjoy a good show.

"I believe the potential suspects may be proud to see many people watch this trial because they want to prove they are innocent," he said. "My idea is that more participation is best."

The Court eats it own

2006-11-16T10:23:00.000+07:00

More news in the Cambodia Daily today, this time two articles. The first is on the front page and includes a photo of the infamous detention center. If there was any doubt about it consisting of a few containers this should put them to rest. The story Tribunal Justice and Judicial Legacy at Odds is quite an interesting read. Its a long one which I will post as soon as it appears online.

The second story is where the action is. In the national section the awkwardly entitled ECCC Needs Outreach, Understanding: Officials, appears to have the Court Officials criticizing their own Public Affairs office; "Poor funding for outreach to the public and an insufficient effort on the part of tribunal staff to explain the long awaited process are putting the courts credibility in danger", they are quoted as saying.

Hard to know what to read from this, are they trying to point out there is a lack of funds? Are they blaming the Public Affairs staff? Are they blaming the ECCC staff in general for not being transparent enough? ECCC Public Affair's Chief Helen Jarivs, did her best to defend the office in the story, saying she would welcome more money and noting that the ECCC is way ahead of where other tribunals were in outreach at this stage. The court is a pretty complex organization, and its own internal rules are still under development so its not too surprising that the general public is not sure how its all going to work.

All and all a little disturbing to see the ECCC staff arguing among themselves in the press. Lets hope they all get on the same page soon.

      ECCC Needs Outreach, Understanding: Officials        Thursday, November 16, 2006

By Douglas Gillison
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

The tribunal established to try former Khmer Rouge leaders is not doing enough to explain itself to the Cambodian public, tribunal officials said Wednesday.

Poor funding for outreach to the public and an insufficient effort on the part of tribunal staff to explain the long-awaited court process are putting the tribunals' credibility in danger, they said.

"We're going to  fail if we don't have the proper outreach program," co-prosecutor Robert Petit said in an interview.

"What I’ve been worried about is the lack of time and opportunities," he said, adding that the budget for outreach was also a concern. "I don’t think it’s adequate."

Co-Investigating Judge Marcel Lemonde agreed.

"If we are misunderstood, if the general public doesn’t understand our mission, we will fail," he said, adding that tribunal staff have recently discussed holding monthly news briefings to explain tribunal operations better, though no date has yet been set for the first such meeting.

At a September public forum on the Khmer Rouge tribunal organized by the Center for Social Development in Kratie province, Petit said he was confronted by basic questions the tribunal must strive to answer for all of Cambodia.

"The majority of people wanted an explanation of why these things happened. Why did they kill? Why did they keep killing after they had the power?" Petit said of the forum.

"We haven’t done a good job of telling people there is a mountain of evidence and about the way we get through it," he said.

The fact that the tribunal will be about criminal accountability and not financial retribution has not been sufficiently explained to the public, and members of the public do not understand how tribunal organs such as the offices of the co-prosecutors, the co-investigating judges and the Supreme Court Chamber function, he added.

Helen Jarvis, chief of public affairs for the tribunal, said the tribunal would welcome additional funds for outreach but her office was doing what it could.

"We've done what we can do. It’s for others to decide," she said. "I think compared to what was done in other tribunals, we're well ahead," she added.

In addition to the $50,000 currently budgeted this year for outreach in the form of print and radio announcements, the tribunal recently received close to $72,000 in extra-budgetary funding from Norway and Australia. This will pay for outreach visits to the provinces as well as producing the current edition of the tribunal's introductory pamphlet, Jarvis said.

Tribunal representatives have made recent visits to pubic events in Sihanoukville, as well as Kratie and Kampot provinces, she added.

Youk Chhang, director of the Documentation Center of Cambodia, said the work of explaining how the tribunal functions is not for the tribunal's investigators and judges but for the office of pubic affairs.

"This is a crucial time," he warned. "If you find it difficult to understand [the tribunal process], imagine the villager," he said, adding that the tribunal's outreach could be improved, even without more funding.

Weekly meetings with members of the public and simple publications explaining the court’s rules, such as the tribunal’s introductory pamphlet, could help narrow the gap between the public's expectations and the realty of the tribunals work, he said.

Enter the Defence

2006-11-14T08:54:00.000+07:00

The ECCC 'Principle Defender' Rupert Skilbeck made himself known to the local NGO and legal community in a conference held at the Sunway Hotel in Phnom Penh on Monday. Under the theme of 'Rights of the Accused', Skilbeck and other speaker gave a hint of the strong voice the defence is going to have in this process.

Skilbeck was openly critical of the recently released Internal Rules (see post below) and highlighted many areas which he felt needed to be revised. Some of the highlights from the meeting;

Trials in Absentia: Currently not permitted, Skilbeck wants them to be allowed
Disqualification of Judges: Currently no provision for this, Skilbeck wants it included
Protection of Witnesses: Skilbeck wants this highlighted and strengthened
The Detention Center: Skilbeck says it needs to be drastically improved and enlarged
Forgien Lawyers: Will they get to argue cases before the court? Skilbeck insists they should
Defence Lawyers: Who gets to choose them. The Cambodian Bar wants to be in control of this, while the Principle Defender wants to create his own list.

Lots of issues here. Particularly interesting is his criticism of the Detention Center as not meeting international standards, something that was highlighted in yesterday's press.

Overall though it is a pretty good sign that someone working inside the court can be so openly critical about its rules and regulations.

Full Article from AFP here:

Witness protection 'insufficient' for Khmer Rouge trials
November 13, 2006
Agence France Presse

Phnom Penh - Not enough had been done to ensure the protection of witnesses called before Cambodia's Khmer Rouge tribunal, lawyers warned Monday, adding the trials of former regime leaders could be jeopardised. "We are concerned," said Rupert Skilbeck of the tribunal's Defence Office, which was established to ensure the rights of defendants. "Compared to other tribunals, it's miniscule ... you have to get this right," he said, calling witnesses protection "insufficient".

"If witnesses are killed or intimidated, you won't have a fair trial," he said, speaking at a meeting on the challenges faced by the defence.

Potentially hundreds of people could be called to court as Cambodia tries former regime leaders, accused of one of the 20th century's worst genocides. Up to two million people died of starvation, overwork, or were executed during the 1975-79 rule of the Khmer Rouge, which turned Cambodia into a vast collective farm between 1975 and 1979 in its drive for an agrarian utopia, forcing millions into the countryside.

A three-year, joint UN-Cambodian tribunal got underway in July, with co-prosecutors expected to hand up the names of potential defendants to an investigating judge by the end of the year.

Trials are expected to start in mid-2007.

A top genocide researcher said earlier this year likely witnesses had gone into hiding amid protection fears. Under the current arrangement, witnesses will come under the protection of Cambodian police, who critics point out have a history of corruption and brutality.

"The setup of witness protection as currently envisaged will be wholly inadequate," said lawyer Richard Rogers in a report. "Relying on a police force that has a reputation for corruption and incompetence would place the lives of the witnesses at risk," he said.

A prison cell with hot water is still a cell

2006-11-13T14:24:00.000+07:00

Cambodia Daily appears to have the activities of the ECCC as its primary focus these days. Today it was a feature about the construction of the dentition center, through the generous donations of the government of Japan. The subtext of the first paragraph however, seems to bait readers into thinking that having cells with air conditioning and hot water might be a waste of money. Even some other bloggers have picked up on this, asking why prisoners should have air conditioning when most Cambodians do not, or even why spending so much money on a detention centre is even wise since so few are going to be tried.

These critics miss the point. The court is supposed to be here to create something that meets international standards. Wait till the locals get a load of a strong vocal defence- something unheard of in the current system. Will they then say that is a waste of money as well?

The fact is that it is the mandate of the court to meet these standards, and providing them in the detention centre is exactly what the money should be spent on. There are those who would no doubt argue they ought to be thrown in a dark hole and left to die- but then that is what the Khmer Rouge would have done, and part of the court is to show that the ways of the Khmer Rouge are no longer the ways on Cambodia.

Four Prison Cells Ready for KR Defendants
Monday, November 13, 2006

By Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

An initial detention center with four cells, each equipped with air conditioning and hot water, was completed last week just outside the grounds of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, ECCC officials said Sunday.

Ten companies plan to visit the ECCC today to place bids on the construction of a more extensive facility, which will likely have eight cells and be paid for by the Cambodian government said tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath. Construction of that larger facility is expected to be completed early next year, he added.

The co-prosecutors and co-investigating judges had requested the immediate construction of the four-cell facility, which cost $45,000 and, was paid for by the Japanese government.

"They may need it before [January]," said Helen Jarvis, chief of public affairs at the ECCC. No date has been released as to when the first arrests might be made.

The four-cell facility lies just outside the fence that demarcates the court's compound. The government will be responsible for the security of the defendants at the facility according to the 2003 agreement between the UN and the Cambodian government.

Security and witness protection are major concerns for a number of tribunal observers and international donors. "The protection of detainees is crucial,'' one foreign diplomat said on condition of anonymity.

He pointed to the case of Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of former Yugoslavia, who died in March before judgment could be passed by the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

Medical information released in May reportedly documented a tempestuous relationship between Milosevic and his doctors, which might have hastened his demise.

Among other things, he refused to take pills, and on the day he died, guards initially decided not to examine him when he failed to move or respond to their greeting, the New York Times reported. It was only after an hour that they inspected him more closely and discovered he had no pulse, raising a question of whether he could have been revived.

"Even in The Hague this happens," said the diplomat. "In Cambodia, anything can happen. We are on alert."

Jarvis said the court also is on alert. "Everybody is taking security seriously, as you would expect" she said.

Internal Rules of the Court

2006-11-07T08:50:00.000+07:00

In what has to be seen as a surprising move the court has published a draft version of its internal rules and asked for Cambodian civil society to comment. This is clearly not going to be business as usual for a Cambodian court. It will be interesting to see, how many of the local and international NGOs take advantage of the opportunity to review this document and then to see how seriously the court takes the input that comes back. But all in all this has to be seen in a pretty positive light by those critics of the court who believed that there would be no transparency.

The press release from the court issued on Thursday claimed that the rules would be up on all the relevant websites by Friday night- of course that didn't happen and as of this morning only the UN site (www.unakrt-online.org) has them available in English and Khmer on its documents page.

Mr. Motoo

2006-11-07T08:39:00.000+07:00

More and more of the Judges are appearing in the press as the profile of the tribunal continues to grow internationally. This time it is the Japanese judge Motoo Noguchi in a softball interview published on Nov 3 in the Yale Herald. Some highlights;

....Yale Herald: How will you be an objective judge in this scenario in light of the tragedies that occurred?

Motoo Noguchi: Judges have to always be impartial. Our job is to evaluate the evidence, find the facts and apply the law, however heinous the crimes are. But for the people of Cambodia, it may be different. It’s difficult to find a Cambodian who hasn’t been affected in anyway by the atrocities committed over these four years. Everyone has had someone killed, whether it’s their parents or relatives or friends. Every Cambodian has his own personal sad memory on this era.

YH: So being a foreigner is an asset?

MN: In terms of procedure, the court sometimes may need to be guided by the international standards on due process or human rights. In that context, judges also need to have a good and knowledge of international justice.

YH: What sets apart the Khmer Rouge trial from others like it?

MN: This is taking place in the Cambodian national court, not what is generally called the international criminal tribunals. This Cambodian tribunal, on the other hand, is a national court that is assisted by the UN and the international community, unlike the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda that are part of the United Nations organism and established by a Security Council resolution....

His comment about how everyone in Cambodia was affected in some way by the Khmer Rouge may come into play should the Defence decide to challenge the impartiality of the Cambodian judges. But this is pretty much a feel good interview about the good work of Japan.

Big News

2006-11-07T08:34:00.000+07:00

Well the Daily is at it again. They suddenly realized that the borders of the city of Phnom Penh had been expanded to include the site of the court- which is about 15 km from the city center. This was done months ago and made public through a Royal Decree and press announcement, but the Daily writes as if it was some kind of a secret move in the night....

Phnom Penh Enlarged To Include Tribunal Site
Thursday, November 2, 2006

By Douglas Gillison and Van Roeun
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

The borders of Phnom Penh Municipality were extended in July to include the Khmer Rouge tribunal premises in Kandal province's Ang Snuol district, which under the tribunal law must be located within the capital, officials said. Four villages which had been located in Ang Snuol district's Kantok commune are now part of Dangkao district's Chaom Chau commune in Phnom Penh, according to a July 29 Royal Decree received this week. "The four villages have a very small number of people so we can do it easily," Municipal Governor Kep Chuktema said Wednesday. The change was not only made to include the tribunal premises but fits with urban planning for the growth of the city, he added. "This was always the plan," tribunal public affairs chief Helen Jarvis said Wednesday. Jarvis denied that the change to the city's boundaries had been made quietly, saying the tribunal had notified the media and that the royal decree ordering the change had been published in the Government Gazette.

A press release and a Royal announcement issued in July, and the Daily is just getting the news now?

Its Official

2006-10-30T10:08:00.000+07:00

The websites for the ECCC and UNAKRT are now officially up and running. The announcement went out in press release on Thursday. The ECCC site appears to be the one were all the good stuff will be, it is certainly the more detailed of the two and promises to have audio and video files of the proceedings. Unfortunately it was down quite a bit over the weekend. The UNAKRT site only deals with the international staff and mandate, but its a nice clean site.

The ECCC site is also in Khmer, and both promise to be in French 'soon'.

Links to both sites are on the menu to the left.

A taste of things to come

2006-10-28T18:00:00.000+07:00

A former KR leader now living in the states had a few things to say to Radio Free Asia this weekend about the Tribunal. First that the 'accused' Pol Pot is not the most responsible, and then declaring that he plans to be a witness where he will reveal that two other former KR leaders should be the first to take the stand. He also claims that the notorious Ieng Sary saved the people of Phnom Penh. The court was never going to bring Pol Pot up on changes anyway so that is a moot point- but his description of the 'real' leaders (including the former King!) up to 1976 makes for interesting reading;

Pol Pot is not the main responsible official?

27 Oct 2006
By Mayarith
Radio Free Asia

A former Khmer Rouge (KR) who asks that his position within the KR regime is not revealed yet and who took refuge in the USA, and he is also planning to become a witness during the KR trial, declared that the main responsible person for the genocide during the KR regime is not the accused Pol Pot.

Sieng Sak, a close confidant of the former KR leader, who currently lives in Lowell, Massachusetts, and who entered Phnom Penh for the first time on 17 April 1975, is accusing two personalities as the responsible persons [in the genocide]: Former Cambodian Monarch Norodom Sihanouk and Khieu Samphan.

....He said that between 1975 and the beginning of April 1976, the Democratic Kampuchea (DK) regime was not yet formed. During that period, it was still the under GRUNC (French acronym for “Gouvernement Royal d’Union National du Cambodge,” Royal Government of the National Union of Cambodia) regime with Samdech Sihanouk as its leader.

Sieng Sak said: “One share of responsibility must go first to Samdech Sihanouk [for the period] between 17 April 1975 and 2 April 1976. Next, Khieu Samphan must bear the responsibility for the period between 3 April 1976 and 6 January 1979. On 17 April [1975], we worked and I worked with Samdech Sihanouk, and we already obtained the proof that they were the days he is responsible for.”

....Sieng Sak, the former KR chief, indicated that soon after the occupation of Phnom Penh by the KR, the mass killing started on 20-21-23 April following the trick announce made on 20 April 1975 asking the population to evacuate from Phnom Penh, the announce also asked that those who hold the rank of second lieutenant and up are invited to return to Phnom Penh to receive Samdech Sihanouk. They were in fact killed near Tuol Kok, they were stabbed and dumped into wells.

Sieng Sak recounted: “On 20 [April 1975] they were called to return back, and on 21-22-23 [April], those who hold a rank of second-lieutenant and lieutenant were killed, the killing did not stop until the 24th. We must ask why the killing was stopped? It was because Ieng Sary prevented it, if it were not for Ieng Sary stopping it on time, everybody in Phnom Penh will be killed, the killing would last 3 days. The majority of them were led to their killings in the evening, they were killed in Tuol Kok … they were smashed and dumped into a well, they were not shot.”

Sieng Sak also said that the responsibility of the killing rest on Samdech Sihanouk because the DK was not announced until 3 April 1976, following the return of Samdech Sihanouk from the UN and he handed the power over to the KR leaders to take over.”......

In response, the Tribunal spokesperson stuck to the standard line. The investigation is still underway, no one has been charged and they don't know who will be called as witnesses. Hard to believe the Defense has not picked up on this however, and may be making plans to spring for a flight for this potential witness if and when Ieng Sary has to face a judge. That would make for an interesting few days in the court.

Revenge of the Lunch

2006-10-27T15:14:00.000+07:00

I posted a silly little story from the Gecko a while ago about how they were having some problems with the cafeteria at the ECCC. Well the Posts' major competitor was not content to let the Post scoop them, so today they made the issue a front page story!

Lunch Is Served Before Justice at Tribunal Office

By Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

Ang snuol district, Kandal province - The trial judges who will sit on the Khmer Rouge tribunal have yet to move into their offices at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia's headquarters, but the buildings are filling up fast.

Powerpoint presentations roll slowly on behind closed doors, and villagers from across the country come for lectures in the wilting auditorium, hoping to learn just what this late promise of justice might mean.

The co-prosecutors and co-investigating judges, who moved in early last month, continue their quiet work at opposite ends of a long hallway. The first indication of who may be indicted by the tribunal could come before the end of the year, said tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath.

In the meantime, the big issue is lunch.

Working across three languages to ensure justice is hard enough, but it turns out that figuring out what everyone at the ECCC likes to eat is no easy matter, either.

The Shop, a cafe on Phnom Penh's Street 240 popular with expatriates that was recruited in February to provide catering services to the ECCC, was temporarily replaced in late September by Pkay Preak, a Khmer catering service.

Many Khmer staffers never ate food from The Shop, preferring to head to a nearby gas station or undertake the modest drive to Phnom Penh International Airport for lunch.

"It was fine for our foreign friends," Reach Sambath said of The Shop and its lunchtime fare.

But, he added, "Cambodians cannot eat it." Ask them to subsist on goat cheese salads, he said, and "the Khmer staff will die in two days. The Shop is good, but not for everybody."

In August, the majority Cambodian contingent of the ECCC convened a working group to discuss the matter of lunch.

Griet Lorre, a Belgian national who opened The Shop five years ago, said she knew Cambodians weren't crazy about her lasagna and shepherd's pie, but that she offered a hot Asian dish every day too. Most cost less than $2.50.

The real problem, she added, was the lack of a kitchen.

To make fresh Khmer food, I needed a kitchen," she said. Lunch orders at the ECCC had to be placed by 10 am so the food could be prepared in the catering kitchen Lorre leases at the Northbridge International School and delivered to the Kandal province court headquarters by lunchtime.

Lorre said she pulled out of the Khmer Rouge tribunal because she didn’t like the terms of a catering agreement the ECCC presented to her in late September. She said she would have had to construct a building for the kitchen, pay rent allow other caterers to use the facility, and charge low prices.

Pkay Preak was then hired on an emergency, temporary basis. But now the international contingent at the ECCC is getting indigestion.

"The offering of frog and tripe in one sitting last week is an example," Peter Foster, the public affairs officer at the tribunal, wrote in an e-mail.

Lest anyone go hungry, Sean Visoth, the administrative director of the ECCC, convened a bilateral catering committee earlier this month, which will soon open a bidding process to select a new caterer by January, Foster wrote.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, lines of people moved down a $2 buffet in the light-filled canteen of the ECCC, piling on rice, curry, and sour soup. There has, however, been one concession made to the court's foreign friends: French bread.

"We'll find a solution that works for everyone," Reach Sambath said. "We are here not to fight about food," he added. "We are here to find justice. This is a small matter."

A small matter indeed. Is this really the only thing that the Daily can come up with to write about the court? And is it really front page news??? You have to wonder who is in charge of that paper sometimes.....

Playing Defence

2006-10-26T23:55:00.000+07:00

World Politics Watch has a nice little piece profiling one of the researchers working with the Prosecution. The full article can be found here: (http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=292)

The story of the researcher is interesting, but there are also some choice bits about the Tribunal that are worth highlighting;

"Potential defense lawyers, seeking to make names for themselves, are already conducting forays into Cambodia and preparing an initial strategy based on attacking the validity of the evidence and the legality of the court itself, as well as seeking to throw doubt on reports that genocide occurred."

A strong defence will be a shock to the average Cambodian. The backlash against the Tribunal when it 'allows' defence arguments will be tough to manage. There is apparently no shortage of challenges that could be raised;

"Unlike the physical evidence produced at the Rwanda, Sierra Leone and former Yugoslavia war crimes tribunals, the remains that lie in the 20,000 uncovered mass graves that dot Cambodia's picturesque landscape have been exposed to decades of human intervention and erosion by violent tropical storms.

Grave robbers seeking gold teeth and valuables stashed on body parts and in clothes of the dead have also taken a toll. The pillaging has not helped the prosecution's case.

This contamination of evidence is expected to underpin the defense case and could prove pivotal as to whether the defiant Khieu Samphan, Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary and his wife, Ieng Thirith, live out their twilight years as free citizens or as felons behind bars."

This story is from months ago, before the Tribunal was up and running, and before the subject of the piece was employed by the ECCC- but the problems have not gone away with time.

Questioning a Pardon

2006-10-26T23:36:00.000+07:00

During the trials in 1996 the Cambodian government issued a few free passes to the KR leadership. At the time it was the only way they saw to get the KR military leaders out of the jungle and stop the violence. Creating stability was more important than justice back then. But that was then and this is now. With the Tribunal now looking like it will actually happen people are beginning to question the pardons.

The question was put to the Tribunal's spokesperson again in this AP story:

October 26, 2006
Official: Former Khmer Rouge foreign minister not immune from prosecution
The Associated Press

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia A spokesman for a special Cambodian genocide tribunal said Thursday that a decade-old royal pardon does not guarantee full immunity from prosecution for Ieng Sary, the former Khmer Rouge foreign minister.

Ieng Sary, 76, received in 1996 a royal pardon from former King Norodom Sihanouk in exchange for leading a mass surrender of Khmer Rouge guerillas to the government. The pardon was granted at the request of the government, grateful to have thousands of Khmer Rouge guerrillas cease their struggle.

"He is saved by the pardon from (only) one crime — genocide. You can get away with one crime but not (with) every crime that you have committed," said Reach Sambath, a spokesman for a joint Cambodia-United Nations tribunal officially called the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.

The pardon effectively nullified a conviction for genocide handed down against Ieng Sary by a special tribunal in 1979. Some observers have said that the trial was essentially a political show trial held by a communist regime installed by Vietnam after Hanoi's troops ousted the Khmer Rouge from power.

Reach Sambath made his comments as prosecutors build their cases for prosecuting surviving Khmer Rouge leaders responsible for the deaths of nearly 2 million people during their 1975-79 period in power.

He added, however, that it will be up to prosecutors and judges to decide on the exact charges and who to indict.

Reach Sambath said Cambodian and U.N.-appointed prosecutors are expected to hand over preliminary results of their investigations to the mixed group of Cambodian and foreign judges before the end of the year.

The judges will then act on the prosecutors' work, he said, adding that indictments could be announced early next year.

The spokesman was clarifying an answer to a question about the pardon that appeared in the frequently-asked-questions section of the tribunal's official Web site, launched Thursday.

"It will be up to the judges to decide on the scope of this pardon" for Ieng Sary, the answer read. "Even if he cannot be retried for genocide, there may be other charges that could be brought against him on the evidence available."

Ieng Sary, as one of the Khmer Rouge's inner circle, has been considered a potential candidate for trial, but many people feared he might escape justice due to the pardon.

Reach Sambath said many people have asked questions about Ieng Sary in various public forums held to raise awareness about the purpose of the Khmer Rouge tribunal.

"They try to get a clear message from us. They want to know whether if you've got amnesty for one crime, you cannot be tried for another crime," he said.

So the pardon may hold for genocide, but he can be charged anyway with anything from Murder to criminal conspiracy to who knows what. This is not new information, it has been in the "Introduction to the Khmer Rouge Trials" booklet for months, but this story will likely get front page coverage here. The question now is what happens when Sary reads this and decides he might want to consider moving to a friendlier climate with a more like minded leadership. Zimbabwe maybe?

The King points fingers

2006-10-22T16:57:00.000+07:00

The political situation in Cambodia continues in its roller coaster. FUNCIPEC is self-destructing and no party other than the CPP is in any shape to govern at this point. But that has not stopped other high profile figures from trying. The latest attempt to form a party by Prince Norodom Ranariddh drew some citicism from those who argued that with no funds or resources or support it was not a serious party. He responded noting that the Khmer Rouge had nothing when they started and ended up in control of the county. Ignoring the ill-advised comparison to the Khmer Rouge, the King Father, Norodom Sihanouk, decided to respond in a published letter which noted the following;

The Khmer Rouge were very rich. The P.R. of China (PRC) gave them a lot of money.
The Khmer Rouge had enormous amount of US dollars with which they (K. Rouge) could buy from the Khmer Lonnolian-Republicans, guns, ammunitions, medicines, etcÂ
The Khmer Rouge had cadres and leaders who master martial art, the warlike science" and technique. They acquired this science and this technique through the PRC and the S.R. of Vietnam. The latter transported for them (K. Rouge), through the Ho Chi Minh trail, without interruption, weapons, ammunitions, etcÂ which were offered by the PRC.

Will the King Father be a witness at the KRT? Because with this letter he points a finger at China, the US and Vietnam as the primary backers of the Khmer Rouge. The KRT has no jurisdiction to put other nations on trial, but its going to be hard to keep them out of the testimony.

The German Ambassador

2006-10-22T16:37:00.000+07:00

KhIf any country has a right to weigh in on a genocide tribunal it has to be Germany, and in a featured interview with the Phnom Penh Post this weekend the German Ambassador, Pius Fischer, gives his view on the KRT. Some highlights from the interview;

...Considering Germany's recent history, does your nation have special lessons to impart to Cambodia, especially with regard to the Khmer Rouge Trial (KRT)?

The situation in Germany after World War II was very different from the situation in Cambodia following the removal of the Khmer Rouge regime. It is not our endeavor to teach any particular lessons, but we do have experiences that the [KRT] could benefit from. It is not just coincidence that we are one of the major donors to the KRT. We think it is very important for the Cambodian population to understand why this happened, who was responsible for it. Only if we understand history can we avoid making the same mistakes again in the future.

What do you hope to see come from the KRT?

First, we anticipate it having a cathartic effect. The population will learn about this part of Cambodian history, which, as I understand it, doesn't play a particularly important role in Cambodia's history books so far. Second, we hope it will send a message that there is no impunity even for those in the highest positions of political power. Finally, we hope that the trial will bring late redemption to the victims of genocide. We must not forget that over 1.7 million people, which was at the time more than a quarter of the Cambodian population, died at the hands of this murderous regime. In Germany we have had to deal with war crimes trials - not just the Nuremberg Trials but a whole series of criminal trials right up until today against former Nazi war criminals. Democratization in post-conflict Germany was a full success. We do hope that similar developments will take place in Cambodia and in our limited means we try to assist Cambodia on this path....

Phnom Penh Post, Issue 15 / 21, October 20 - November 2, 2006

Education, Justice, Resolution. Those appear to be pretty good goals for the Court, though his hope that this will lead to the Democratization of Cambodia may be a bit ambitious.

The Gecko

2006-10-21T18:05:00.000+07:00

The Phnom Penh Post publishes a little column called the Gecko every two weeks. It is full of rumour and scandal (though not as much as it used to). This week it highlights the developments in the important 'cafeteria issue' at the Court. Apparently The Shop has been unceremoniously removed, leaving the facility, which is located 10 miles out of town, without any food or drink services.

This may explain the reports from the Phnom Penh airport, where apparently since the beginning of the month two or three busloads of staff arrive each day to get lunch. No Cambodians in the group however, they must be bringing their own food to work?

If you are planning to go out to the court I guess it would be wise to eat before you go and bring some water with you. Might even be good idea to call ahead and see if they need any extra water and food delivered. 56 million and no cafeteria. I know the ECCC is not a rich court, but you would think at least food and water would have been a part of the plan.

Speak of the web

2006-10-20T23:40:00.001+07:00

There suddenly seems to be two sites on the trials.

www.eccc.gov.kh and www.unakrt-online.org are both working.

Not sure if these are just test sites or the real thing since there hasn't been any announcement. But good to see something happening on the web.

Fear or Confusion?

2006-10-17T21:23:00.000+07:00

DC Cam seems to have a bit of an identity crisis. One day they are on the front page of the local press handing over all thier information for the use of the court, the next day they are running thier own judical police training where group of hopefuls tramp around over the killing fields contaminating evidence. Today they were backing a report that claims there is a growing fear from the population about giving evidence to the ECCC. Careful reading of the story in Cambodia Daily however seems to be more about confusion than fear- and of course in order to do the report at all quite a few people must have been happy to talk to authors. Its also not clear from the report how long ago these interviews were made.

Still the reponses from the ECCC offical, Peter Foster, are a little light. The person responsible for witness protection will not be here for weeks, yet 'all appropriate percautions are being made' for the interviews... hard to know what that actually means. Perhaps it they can not reveal the detials of what they are doing. But Foster has it right in his last quote when he notes that after all the delays many still have are hard time believing the trial will even take place.

Potential Tribunal Witnesses Fear Testifying: Study
Tuesday, October 17, 2006 By Erika Kinetz
THE CAMBODIA DAILY
A new study by the Documentation Center of Cambodia suggests that fear, limited information, and lack of a clear witness protection program have started to quiet voices that could potentially testify to the horrors wrought by the 1975-1979 Democratic Kampuchea regime.

DC-Cam Director Youk Chhang said that survivors once associated with the Khmer Rouge are beginning to ask some sensitive questions: "What’s in it for me? Will I be given amnesty? Will my name be cleared?"

And victims of the regime have begun to wonder what will keep them safe if and when they are asked to speak up at the trial of the surviving leaders of the Khmer Rouge.

You can sense the fear," Youk Chhang said. "You can sense there has been a shift of thinking."

Investigators from the prosecutor's office of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia have already begun to interview witnesses and gather information from the field, but the tribunal's witness protection program is not yet fully functional.

There is a budget for a witness protection officer, but the actual officer is not expected to arrive for another two weeks, said Peter Foster, the ECCC's public affairs officer. The protection of potential witnesses outside the court is the responsibility of Cambodian authorities, he added.

Nonetheless, ECCC co-prosecutors carefully consider the security needs for each interview on a case-by-case basis and all appropriate security precautions are being taken, Foster said. "People should have confidence that they can tell their story without fear," he wrote. And, he added, "So far the ECCC investigators have been able to interview many witnesses, all of whom have spoken to the prosecutors voluntarily."

Though there are no uniform procedures for witness protection, safe houses, identity protection, and other measures are being considered.

But the lack of clarity and the fact that witnesses are being asked to testify before a formal protection program is up and running has some rights groups worried.

"They put people in a very dangerous situation by interviewing people without an effective program of protection," said Kek Galabru, founder of local rights group Licadho.

Geerteke Jansen, a legal associate at DC-Cam, spent the last three months talking with people in Takeo province: victims, former Khmer Rouge cadre, the ordinary villagers referred to as "base" people during the regime, combatants, judges, prosecutors and government officials among them.

Twenty of the 30 villagers Jansen spoke with said that they were willing to testify at a Khmer Rouge tribunal. Complicating the situation, however, is the fact that, in some cases, former Khmer Rouge inmates live opposite former prison guards, and former cadre live cheek by jowl with victims.

'They don't know what to expect if they talk about the involvement of their neighbors," she said. "What will be the consequences?"

Those that are afraid to testify, Jansen said, are afraid of retribution, wreaked not just by their neighbors but also, possibly, by the families of the highest-ranking Khmer Rouge leaders who will stand trial.

One man who said he would not testify explained that it was against his Buddhist beliefs, which he felt exhorted him to live in peace with his neighbors and simply accept the past.

Others, Jansen said, were too shy or uneducated to reckon with the big, abstract work of justice for the crimes of the Khmer Rouge.

"They are afraid to talk. They don't know what to expect," she said.

And that may be the root of the problem.

From what the ECCC has seen during its outreach activities, Cambodians have many different expectations about the tribunal, Foster wrote. "After so many false starts in the past, I am sure that some people are even unsure if trials will actually take place," he wrote. However, the more people learn about the ECCC the more their confidence will grow in the process, he said.

Land of the Missing

2006-10-15T10:42:00.000+07:00

There are a couple of links to the left of this blog. But strangely none of them are to the Website for the ECCC. The first is a link to the Cambodian Government's website from something called the Khmer Rouge Task Force (which is no longer in operation) and the other is a strange page from the UN giving no currnet information and advertizing for judge positions that were filled months ago. So what's up? The ECCC has been in operation since February and still has no website?

Speaking of missing things has anyone seen an ECCC car or bus anywhere in town? There were a few at the confernce in Kratie, but in Phnom Penh you never see anything at all. I met with one of the international staff memebers a few weeks ago and he arrived in an old suzuki sidekick. Even stranger, I have heard from some folks to that work near there, that the bulk of the staff arrive to the office each morning in purple Cambodian 'tourist' buses. The UN assistance didn't include cars? A message to the UN from Hen Sen maybe? Or has someone in the ECCC missed the class on how to establish your image. I remember reading that Germany had donated the cars for the court, so it might be interesting to go out to the ECCC site and see if they have a parking lot full of cars collecting dust.

Lets hope they are not useing government 'tourist' buses to interview witnesses.

Spokesperson for the Ghosts

2006-10-11T10:34:00.000+07:00

A very nice piece on the ECCC spokesperson in Asian Sentinel. A few other bloggers have reprinted it as well, but its worth spreading it around. Mr. Reach would appear to be the ideal person to be representing the public face of the court. Some choice quotes;

A respected journalist with a master’s degree from Columbia University and a career as a university lecturer and reporter in Cambodia with Agence-France Presse behind him, Reach Sambath has suffered as much as anyone from the Khmer Rouge. He is a persuasive spokesman for a tribunal many criticize as being too little, too late and too political to accomplish much of anything. “I am a spokesperson for ghosts,” he explains as we sit in the bar of the elegant Raffles Le Royale Hotel in Phnom Penh. “I am surrounded by ghosts and if I don’t do good they will know.”
They are searching only for senior leaders, not the thousands of lower-ranking cadres who slaughtered, tortured and starved as many as 2 million people on orders from Pol Pot, who died in 1998, and other leaders. The likely suspects—among them Khmer Rouge Foreign Minister Ieng Sary, President Khieu Samphan and “Brother Number Two” Nuon Chea—have been living free in Cambodia for many years. Only “Comrade Duch,” the chief interrogator at Tuol Seng prison in Phnom Penh where thousands died, is under arrest, having confessed to his role after a foreign journalist found him in 1999.

Trying the few ageing despots, Reach Sambath says calmly, will be enough. It has to be. “Things here now are much better now because we have peace and stability,” he says. Cambodia is becoming normal and the last thing left is to deal with the past. That is the job of the tribunal. All of this is still inside the minds of our people,” he says. But it is time, he believes, for the ghosts to sleep.

In the French Press

2006-10-11T10:16:00.000+07:00

The arrival of the International Co-Prosecutor, the French Judge Marcel LeMonde (no relation to the paper), seems to have significanly raised the profile of the Extraordinary Chambers in the French press. A few interviews have appeared, but also some very good in-depth reporting. Below is the text from one of a few features in LeMonde Diplomatique to come out this week:

Cambodia: Khmer Rouge in court
Almost three decades after the fall of the Khmer Rouge, a UN-sponsored tribunal has been set up in Cambodia to prosecute the leaders responsible for genocide. Yet non-Cambodians who share responsibility for the deaths will not be indicted.

By Raoul-Marc Jennar

VIETNAM invaded Cambodia (which the Khmer Rouge had renamed Democratic Kampuchea) in December 1978, after three years of Khmer Rouge attacks on its territory. The world then discovered the mass crimes of the Pol Pot regime (1). The United Nations, the United States, China and their allies responded by jointly condemning a change of regime brought about by foreign intervention: the Cambodians had committed the crime of being liberated from a barbaric regime by an ally of the Soviet Union.

The new People’s Republic of Kampuchea (PRK) was not recognised, and the Khmer Rouge’s ambassador, Thiounn Prasith, continued to occupy Cambodia’s seat at the UN for another 10 years while, inside the country, the Khmer Rouge massacred the population in areas still under their control.

The US classified the Khmer Rouge leaders as “non-communist personalities” (2) to be supported in their struggle against Vietnamese occupation; China and the West rebuilt Pol Pot’s army in Thailand.

In 1979 the UN Commission on Human Rights refused to consider a report containing 995 pages of testimony on mass violations of basic rights in Kampuchea. For 10 more years the UN rejected all efforts by the PRK, by survivors such as Dith Pran (3) and by human rights activists such as David Hawk, to bring the Khmer Rouge leaders to justice.

Peace negotiations began in 1989. Because of the desire to involve the Khmer Rouge (which led to the failure of the UN’s attempt to pacify Cambodia), the crimes of the Pol Pot regime were passed over. The terms “crimes against humanity” and “genocide” were banned from all official documents. The Paris Accords of 1991 employed the phrase “policies and practices of the past” to denote what was in fact the extermination of nearly a third of the Cambodian population.

A trial is a necessity for the survivors now demanding justice: the crimes in question have never been tried by a neutral and impartial court. The resulting impunity is intolerable. How can there be justice in ordinary affairs when the greatest criminals go free? The field is wide open for revisionists of all shades. What the absence of justice can lead to became clear in 2004 when the head of one of the three parties represented in Cambodia’s National Assembly congratulated the Khmer Rouge movement on “its action over the last 30 years”.

Kampuchea was in fact tried by a “revolutionary people’s court” in 1979, in the person of two of its leaders, Pol Pot and Ieng Sary, the deputy prime minister and minister of foreign affairs. Both were sentenced to death in absentia. But that trial, which gave many survivors an opportunity to testify, is tainted in the collective memory of the Cambodian people by the fact that it was held under Vietnamese influence. Until the movement’s demise in 1998, the Khmer Rouge continued to claim that the massacres perpetrated by the Pol Pot regime had been carried out by the Vietnamese. That claim still provides a satisfactory explanation for the young in a country where 51% of the population is under 18.

A step forward

It is a positive development that the trial, finally decided on by the Cambodian government and the UN in 2003 and scheduled to begin in 2007, will be held in Cambodia and in the Khmer language.

In a letter of June 1977 to the UN secretary general, the Cambodian authorities requested “the assistance of the UN and the international community in bringing to justice those responsible for genocide and crimes against humanity during the period of Democratic Kampuchea”, with the aim of “establishing the truth” and “trying those responsible”. The UN General Assembly acceded to that request at the end of the year. But it took seven years of negotiations to overcome the difficulties.

The UN proposed an international tribunal but Cambodia wanted a Cambodian court assisted by foreign judges and advisers. In response, the UN demanded compliance with international judicial standards, guarantees of the arrest of suspects identified by the court and the involvement of international judges at all stages of the proceedings. The problem was that all Cambodian judges are both judge and party to the case, since they are all survivors of the Pol Pot regime and relatives of its victims. The Cambodian judiciary, rebuilt after 1979, has obviously not yet achieved a satisfactory level of competence and independence.

A law passed in 2001 was amended in 2004 to make the proceedings of the “extraordinary chambers in the courts of Cambodia for the prosecution of crimes committed during the period of Democratic Kampuchea” acceptable to the UN. All indictments will be the joint responsibility of a Cambodian prosecutor and a foreign prosecutor proposed by the UN, each assisted by an investigating magistrate of the same nationality. The trial court will have three Cambodian and two foreign judges, and its decisions will require the affirmative vote of four judges. The Supreme Court will have four Cambodian and three foreign judges, and its decisions will require five affirmative votes. So the agreement of a foreign judge will be required in all cases.

It took two more years for the UN and the Cambodian government to raise the $56m budget, and for the judges (17 Cambodian and eight foreign) to take up their duties. Suspects will be prosecuted for breaches of Cambodian criminal law in force in 1975, international law on human rights, and international conventions ratified by Cambodia. The court will also be competent to try crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and violations of the Geneva Conventions on which international human rights law is based. It can also try breaches of the Hague Convention on the protection of cultural property.

Genocide contested

Some people dispute that genocide happened. Yet the use of that term seems unquestionably justified in the case of the extermination of nearly 40% of the Muslim population, the Cham, for no other reason than that they were Cham. It also seems justified in the case of the thousands executed for not having “a Khmer soul in a Khmer body”, meaning people of Thai-Khmer or Sino-Khmer parentage, and especially Vietnamese-Khmer people who were suspected of sympathising with Vietnam.

Members of Pol Pot’s government, of the leadership of the Communist Party of Kampuchea (Angkar, “the organisation”), of the security forces (Santebal, the political police) and of the S-21 torture and execution centre are still alive. These include Khieu Samphan, head of state; Nuon Chea, known as Brother Number Two, who was Pol Pot’s closest associate, the head of Angkar and the regime’s second-in-command; Ieng Sary, who was the deputy prime minister; Khieu Thirith, who was Ieng Sary’s wife, Pol Pot’s sister-in-law, a minister and member of the central committee; Thiounn Mumm, a minister; Keat Chhon, another minister (4); and Thiounn Prasith, who was ambassador to the UN and the man who knows most about the US role in supporting the Khmer Rouge from 1979 to 1990. Kang Kek Ieu, alias “Duch”, the head of Centre S-21, is also still alive; as are Sou Met and Meah Mut, the commanders of the air force and the navy. Except for Thiounn Prasith, who appears to be under US protection, all are currently living in Cambodia.

But will they all be investigated with a view to indictment? Doubts arise because of the nature of the pacification process from the departure of the UN in 1993 to the surrender of the last Khmer Rouge stronghold in 1998. Ieng Sary went over to the government side in 1996 and was granted a royal amnesty for his 1979 conviction. Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea gave themselves up at the end of 1998. Sou Met and Meah Mut have joined the Cambodian armed forces. Only Duch is in prison. The number and status of those who are prosecuted will be a major indication of the trial’s credibility.

Another question is whether the investigating prosecutors will ask for Angkar, the regime’s supreme administrative organisation, in whose name the massacres were carried out, and Santebal, the political police, to be declared criminal organisations. Or for the standing committee of the Communist Party of Democratic Kampuchea, which decided on and planned the massacres, to be declared such an organisation. If so, it will be possible to indict any person on the grounds that he was a member of one of those organisations 27 years before the trial investigation began this July.

Pol Pot, Son Sen, the minister of defence and the man in charge of Santebal; Yun Yat, a minister; Thiounn Thieunn, a minister; Ta Mok, a military commander; and Ke Pauk, who was Ta Mok’s second-in-command, have all died, having enjoyed the protection of the international community from 1979 to 1993. Son Sen was a member of the supreme national council established by the Paris Accords of 1991 and the designated embodiment of national sovereignty during the transition period.

The US accepted the principle of a trial on condition that the court’s jurisdiction be confined to crimes committed in Cambodia during the period 17 April 1975 to 6 January 1979. Foreigners who share responsibility for the tragedy before and after the period of Democratic Kampuchea will not be indicted. No Thai civil or military leader will stand trial, although Thailand constantly interfered in Cambodian affairs from 1953 onwards, spared no effort to destabilise the neutral Cambodian regime before 1970 and served as a rear base for Pol Pot’s army from 1979 to 1998.

Singapore was the hub for supplies to Pol Pot’s army after 1979, but its leaders will not be brought to book. Nor will the European governments, led by Britain, that supplied arms and munitions to the Khmer Rouge from 1979 to 1991. Nor Henry Kissinger, for his responsibility in illegal bombings from March 1969 to May 1970, the coup of 18 March 1970 that overthrew Sihanouk, and the invasion of Cambodia in April 1970. Nor US President Jimmy Carter and his national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, who in 1979 chose to condemn the liberation of Cambodia by Vietnam, impose a total embargo on Cambodia and support the rebuilding and supply of Pol Pot’s army (5). That preference remained the choice of the Reagan and Bush (Sr) administrations until 1990.

The Price of Justice

2006-10-09T15:34:00.000+07:00

For Cambodia that price is 56 million dollars. Too much? Sure seems like it for the folks riding water buffaloes into work and spending less than a dollar a day to get by. But that is not really a fair comparison. How much does a trial like this cost normally? Is Cambodia getting good value here, or is this really just a money pit. Well it turns out that 56 million is actually pretty skint for international justice.

The Hariri trial in Lebanon, another Hybrid court, has a budget of about 44 million dollars. (at least according to statements from the potential prosecutors) That is 44 million to hold a trial for the death of one person. In Sierra Leone the budget has been set at 104 million over 4 years, while the court in the Hague is spending 100 million each year. This from a report in the American Society for International Law :

The cost of the Special Court is estimated at U.S. $22 million for its first year of operation, compared to the ICTY and ICTR whose annual budgets each exceed $90 million. This estimated cost does not, however, include funding for detention facilities, investigations, translators, or defense counsel. (10) While Security Council Resolution 1315 had suggested the mechanism of voluntary contributions to fund the Special Court, the Secretary-General has opted instead for assessed contributions from U.N. member states (in which case the United States will be assessed twenty-five percent of the costs) on the grounds that "voluntary contributions will not provide the assured and continuous source of funding which would be required to appoint the judges, the Prosecutor and the Registrar, to contract the services of all administrative and support staff and to purchase the necessary equipment." (11)

Yet most of the recent press here has been quick to call the Khmer Rouge Trials the next coming of UNTAC. Seems like a report just released from Open Society Justice initiative has a slightly opposing view:

Funding woes hindering KR tribunal:

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (AFP) - Cambodia needs at least double the money currently budgeted to try former Khmer Rouge leaders, a prominent legal organization has said, warning that the "unrealistically thin" funding was already hurting the tribunal's work.

So far 56.3-million-dollars has been requested for the long-awaited tribunal, but Cambodia and the United Nations have yet to secure even that amount, with the tribunal facing a shortfall of several million dollars.

However, the Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI), a legal reform group which monitors the tribunal, said that even if fully funded, tribunal staff will be forced "to make decisions based solely, or predominantly, on financial considerations".

Condemned for being a money pit one day and woefully underfunded the next. The true cost of Justice remains a mystery.

A Few Words from the Prosecution

2006-10-03T09:09:00.000+07:00

Last week an local NGO sponsored a forum in the northern Cambodian town of Kratie. It was notable because it included presentations not only from the usual crew of NGOs (how many times can we hear DC CAM talk?) but also had both the Extraordinary Chambers Prosecutors present.

The forum opened with a film showing how the entire Khmer Rouge regime was the fault of the US (ok maybe that was not the point of the film, but that message sure was in it) and then provided lots of history about those years. The question and answer session was particularly interesting with the Canadian Co-Prosecutor Robert Petit, giving the audience some nice ideas to think about- I am paraphrasing here but;

“Justice without the rule of law is worthless”

“There can be no progress in any society without justice. Money spent to achieve it is a valuable investment in a nations future.”

“People commit genocide for the same reason they steal a cow, because they believe they will not be punished”

“People kill for power, and once in power they kill to keep it.”

“There can be no reconciliation without justice.”

It was pretty good stuff.

The court must be concered over the reports that came out later however. Apparently many of the guests thought the trial would be taking place that day. Others knew nothing about the Khmer Rouge other than they grew a lot of potatoes, and were mystifed about the need for a tribunal at all. The story according to Cambodia Daily;

Grievances Air at Khmer Rouge Tribunal Forum

By socheata

Monday, October 2, 2006

By Erik Wasson and Prak Chan Thul
THE CAMBODIA DAILY

Several villagers said they wanted the tribunal to target local officials who had killed their neighbors. Others said they wanted the death penalty for those convicted, and that they also hoped the tribunal would investigate high-profile political killings in more recent years.

Kratie Town - Again and again in hurried and sometimes passionate voices, villagers stood up to ask the Khmer Rouge tribunal's co-prosecutors a succession of basic questions that had no simple answers.

Why did Khmers kill Khmers? Why did people support them? Did their leaders learn to kill while in France? Why didn't the UN help Cambodia during the regime? Why is the trial being held? Why don't we just forget about what happened and move on?

Khmer Rouge tribunal co-prosecutors Robert Petit and Chea Leang did their best to answer the questions of more than 100 villagers from Kratie, Mondolkiri, Ratanakkiri and Stung Treng provinces.

By the time Petit and Chea Leang had finished and a short documentary about the Khmer Rouge had been shown at the hotel where the Center for Social Development forum was held Thursday, villagers said many questions remained unanswered.

They added that prior to the public forum, they had known very little about how the tribunal would operate or, apparently, about the Khmer Rouge regime.

"I don't know anything about the Khmer Rouge...this is the first time I saw a film like that," said Kratie villager Pen Met, 68.

"I didn't know that they killed people. I just knew that they worked hard to grow potatoes."

Phoek Thy, 30, a member of the ethnic Phnong minority from Mondolkiri province, said he was surprised that no one had actually stood trial at the forum.

"I thought there would be a tribunal today," he said.

Kratie villager Sin Sun, 68, a former Khmer Rouge fighter, said prior to the fall of Phnom Penh in April 1975, he had thought he was fighting for then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk.

Sin Sun asked the co-prosecutors if they could explain to him the political indoctrination he received when he was fighting with the Khmer Rouge.

"Why did they train me to sing [political songs]? Please explain their policies," he said, adding that he also wanted to know why six members of his family were killed.

Petit and Chea Leang emphasized that surviving Khmer Rouge leaders, not low-level officials or countries such as China or the US, will be subject to the tribunal law.

Petit also attempted to address why the Khmer Rouge were so brutal

"For whatever ideological reasons they believe in, they kill huge numbers of people to get and remain in power," he said. "In Cambodia this is not as clear as in other places. The system they set up and the policies they followed made it impossible for most people to know why they were being killed."

Asked why the UN did not intervene between 1975 and 1979, Petit responded "That question is best answered by those in power at the time."

Several villagers said they wanted the tribunal to target local officials who had killed their neighbors. Others said they wanted the death penalty for those convicted, and that they also hoped the tribunal would investigate high-profile political killings that have occurred in more recent years.

"The trial would not be done as severely as I want," said retired teacher Tim Ninn, 60, an advocate of the death penalty for the Khmer Rouge leaders.

Tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath said a death sentence would be unconstitutional.

Reach Sambath also said the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia will finance television publicity spots about the tribunal which are expected to air before the end of the year.

But he added that in remote areas where people cannot access television and radio, direct outreach programs are necessary.

Chea Leang told villagers that the possibility of compensation being paid to victims is being discussed. But she added that even if Khmer Rouge suspects have accumulated extensive wealth since their regime was toppled, only the wealth they gained from 1975-1979 period could be confiscated by the court if they are found guilty.

Dr Sotheara Chhim, a psychiatrist with the Transcultural Psychosocial Organization who attended the forum, said the apparent lack of understanding by villagers about me regime could be psychologically motivated.

"There is a conspiracy of avoidance both at the national and individual level in Cambodia," he said.

"Parents never talk about it so there is little healing and a lot of ignorance about the past."

Suppressing memories of the past will come at a price, he warned.

"You cannot keep avoiding what happened. Part of it will resurface," he said.

Who is to Blame?

2006-09-30T19:09:00.000+07:00

The KR Tribunal is a national court, so I guess it makes sense that they are not allowed to put countries on trial. But that is not very satisfying to a lot of people in Cambodia. The folks about to be put on trial are already pointing fingers of responsibility at the US and China while the local farmers still can’t quite believe that one of their own could have killed so many.

But with stories like this coming out, its going to be hard to convince the population here that the United States ought to be one of the first to face justice….

From the Cambodia Daily, 25 September: The total weight of bombs that the US dropped on Cambodia during its war with Vietnam may have been five times greater than previously thought, according to a new academic study.

The bombing of Cambodia also began in 1965, more than three years earlier than is widely believed, according to historians Taylor Owen and Ben Kiernan whose analysis of US Air Force data released in 2000 appear in the October issue of Canada's The Walrus magazine.

Air Force data indicates that 2,756,941 tons of bombs were dropped in 230,516 sorties over 113,716 sites between 1965 and 1973, the authors say.

This surpasses the bomb weight dropped by the allied forces on all combat theaters during the whole of World War II, which totaled 2 million tons, they write.

...Information Minister and government spokesman Khieu Kanharith said the bombing encouraged rural Cambodians to join the Khmer Rouge. But he said he was not concerned with the numbers of bombs dropped. "We are Buddhists...so we try to forgive and forget," he said.

US Embassy spokesman Jeff Daigle could not be reached for comment.

No place for a King

2006-09-26T12:05:00.000+07:00

Post anything about the Khmer Rouge Trials and you are like to be faced with an onslaught from the online community. There are bloggers out there who hate the idea because it involves the NGO and International community- and therefore must be bad. There are those who think that the whole KR period was nothing more than a US/Chinese/Vietnamese conspiracy and is focused on the wrong people. And there are those who think that the whole thing is nothing more than a money pit which will deliver nothing to anyone in the end. Publish an open blog and even if you are the King of the country, you may find yourself under attack from self appointed cyber warriors.

King-Father to stop publication of news articles

22 Sept 2006
By Pov Ponlok
Radio Free Asia

For monarch, King Norodom Sihanouk, had decided anew to stop the publication of all news articles detailing the last days of the Khmer Republic regime collected from news agencies such as AFP, UPI, AP, and Reuters, as well as daily articles regarding history, funny stories, etc…

In a message dated 21 Sept, the former monarch indicated that his decision was made because he received shames, threats, verbal attacks, and accusations, as well as numerous other graphical injustices.

The former monarch said that he has decided to permanently stop several other activities, such as the writing of movie scripts and other singing and dancing in order for him to live a normal life as a retired and old person.

Nevertheless, King Norodom Sihanouk said that he reserves the right to write and publish corrections and clarifications in order to preserve the truth when his honor forced him to do so.