Son Soubert, member of the Constitutional CountilBy John Maloy and Yun Samean
THE CAMBODIA DAILY
Constitutional Council member Son Soubert said Tuesday that the law passed last week by the National Assembly limiting the speech of parliamentarians is "ridiculous" and likely unconstitutional.
Son Soubert’s remark was directed at Article 5 of the law, which criminalizes statements by lawmakers that "abuse an individual's dignity, social customs, public order and national security."
The law is farcical because it fails to define exactly what abusing an individual's dignity means, said Son Soubert, adding that he doubted such a definition is even possible.
Son Soubert’s comments come as Sam Rainsy claimed that his party has submitted a petition to the Constitutional Council asking that Article 5 be ruled unconstitutional.
The SRP petition states that the provision violates Article 80 of the Constitution, which states that Assembly members cannot be arrested or prosecuted for any opinions expressed while exercising their duties.
The petition contained the signatures of 15 SRP parliamentarians— more than the 10 percent of Assembly members required to compel the Constitutional Council to review the law.
Sam Rainsy, who admitted Monday that 10 of his SRP lawmakers had actually voted in favor of the law, said that most of the lawmakers who signed the Constitutional Council petition were not present when the law was passed.
Despite the 10 SRP members voting for the law, Sam Rainsy said that all 24 SRP Assembly members now want Article 5 annulled.
Son Soutert said that he has not yet seen the SRP petition but added that if Article 5 does restrict the speech of parliamentarians, it is likely unconstitutional.
CPP lawmaker Cheam Yeap reiterated his stance that the law was designed to prevent lawmakers from abusing their immunity. He also said that it was "shameful" for SRP lawmakers to vote for a law and then seek its annulment.
Son Soubert’s remark was directed at Article 5 of the law, which criminalizes statements by lawmakers that "abuse an individual's dignity, social customs, public order and national security."
The law is farcical because it fails to define exactly what abusing an individual's dignity means, said Son Soubert, adding that he doubted such a definition is even possible.
Son Soubert’s comments come as Sam Rainsy claimed that his party has submitted a petition to the Constitutional Council asking that Article 5 be ruled unconstitutional.
The SRP petition states that the provision violates Article 80 of the Constitution, which states that Assembly members cannot be arrested or prosecuted for any opinions expressed while exercising their duties.
The petition contained the signatures of 15 SRP parliamentarians— more than the 10 percent of Assembly members required to compel the Constitutional Council to review the law.
Sam Rainsy, who admitted Monday that 10 of his SRP lawmakers had actually voted in favor of the law, said that most of the lawmakers who signed the Constitutional Council petition were not present when the law was passed.
Despite the 10 SRP members voting for the law, Sam Rainsy said that all 24 SRP Assembly members now want Article 5 annulled.
Son Soutert said that he has not yet seen the SRP petition but added that if Article 5 does restrict the speech of parliamentarians, it is likely unconstitutional.
CPP lawmaker Cheam Yeap reiterated his stance that the law was designed to prevent lawmakers from abusing their immunity. He also said that it was "shameful" for SRP lawmakers to vote for a law and then seek its annulment.
4 comments:
Ah Cheam Yap is a Vietcong trained economist and now he became a lawmaker? Who appointed AH Cheam Yap to be a lawmaker? Oh yes it is AH HUN SEN! What have AH Cheam Yap learned from the Vietcong? He learn to be super and super stupid as Cambodian leader and now he is applying his stupidity on Cambodian people!
Cambodian law maker must understand about what is free speech, private life and public life, defamation.
1-Free speeches. Every individual must have all their freedom to speech out all their right by considering the right of others. They have their freedom to express all their freedom limited by the constitution of their country and all the laws of their country without worrying any harassement from anyone else.
2-Private life. When you are doing your private business to earn your living, you must have a law to protect you from extortion from governemnt officials, from all kind of pressures from high ranking officials. You must have your full freedom to be free from any critics as long as your business is legally managed.
3-Public life. When you work as a politician, Minister, Prime Minister, government officials, your working is relating to the leading of other prople lives. Therefore you must entile to be criticised and scruitinised by public. Everyone has their freedom to express their mishappiness and their tehir desagreement with your leadership. They can complain to the state to investigate on you for misbehavious and misconduct. If you cannot bear from this kind of life, you must resign and adopt for a private life.
4-Defamation. If you are working on public office and leading a public life, you cannot sue anyone for defamation because your decision and all your act has impacted to everyone life so you are fully scruitinised by all public. But if you cannnot accept this kind of life, you must adopt for a private life by working for a private company or yourself, then you can sue some one for defame you because the defamation against you can damage your future, your business and the interest of others.
Look NZ is the second best country in the world for doing business. Why? because we have this kind of law. Cambodia need New Zealander to assist them to set up law if Cambodia want to transform it self into a Business friendly country.
Excellent comparison of defamation, free speech, private life and public life. I totally agree with these.
Only if those babaric, outlaws, Viet's lackeys, khmer killers such as HUN SEN and his cronies would understand what it means? But again, their only mission is to finish khmer off as per HANOI's order!
090/06/06
AKnijaKhmer
Post a Comment