By Erika Kinetz and Prak Chan Thul
THE CAMBODIA DAILY
"It’s a sad fact that a climate of fear and retribution
in Cambodia means that people are often only willing
to provide information confidentially."
—Brad Adams, Asia Director Human Rights Watch
The most widely heard call in the wake of Tuesday's allegations by Human Rights Watch that top government officials are interfering in the Khmer Rouge tribunal was for evidence.
"How could [Human Rights Watch] know?" asked Huot Vuthy, a pretrial chamber judge at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.
"They didn't even come to the meeting," he said.
Huot Vuthy added that ECCC Supreme Court Justice Kong Srim, whom Human Rights Watch identified as the leading obstructionist during the foiled plenary meeting talks over the tribunal's internal rules, was singled out by the rights group because he spoke at the plenary and has a high position in the court.
Rights Watch on Wednesday stood by their claims of government interference in the tribunal process but declined to name their sources.
"We have no doubt that our statement is accurate," Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch, wrote in an e-mail.
"The kind of political manipulation we describe here is endemic in the Cambodian judicial system and has been reported—privately for fear of retaliation—by judges and prosecutors, including very senior members of the judiciary, consistently for many years," he wrote.
"It’s a sad fact that a climate of fear and retribution in Cambodia means that people are often only willing to provide information confidentially."
Rights Watch said in its Tuesday statement that the tribunal had been staffed with Cambodians loyal to Prime Minister Hun Sen, Cabinet Minister Sok An, and National Police Chief Hok Lundy.
The organization also claimed that government officials had instructed the Cambodian ECCC members at last month's plenary session to delay the adoption of crucial internal rules, without which a trial cannot proceed.
"Knowing the society, including the history of this regime, and the history of the tribunal from its inception, I think Human Rights Watch is on key in its statement," said Theary Seng, executive director of the Center for Social Development.
"The Cambodian Bar Association wouldn't be this vocal and insistent if they didn't have some political backing from higher up," she said.
Hok Lundy and ECCC Supreme Court judge Kong Srim could not be reached for comment.
Adhoc, Licadho and the Open Society Justice Initiative stopped short of endorsing Rights Watch's statement in their comments on the failure of the plenary session.
"When Ky Tech didn't allow Suon Visal to be the president of the Bar Association, we were worried," Licadho President Kek Galabru said.
"When he was re-elected we were worried. Now, when he obstructs the training, we are more worried. But we cannot be sure. We cannot accuse the government. We don't have proof she added.
Nor, she said, does she enjoy the immunity that Rights Watch, as a foreign organization, does in Cambodia.
Adhoc President Thun Saray said that the progress of the tribunal will prove whether Rights Watch's claims are correct.
"If there is no acceleration, it means it’s an intentional delay," Thun Saray said. But he added, "It's too early to tell."
"How could [Human Rights Watch] know?" asked Huot Vuthy, a pretrial chamber judge at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.
"They didn't even come to the meeting," he said.
Huot Vuthy added that ECCC Supreme Court Justice Kong Srim, whom Human Rights Watch identified as the leading obstructionist during the foiled plenary meeting talks over the tribunal's internal rules, was singled out by the rights group because he spoke at the plenary and has a high position in the court.
Rights Watch on Wednesday stood by their claims of government interference in the tribunal process but declined to name their sources.
"We have no doubt that our statement is accurate," Brad Adams, Asia director of Human Rights Watch, wrote in an e-mail.
"The kind of political manipulation we describe here is endemic in the Cambodian judicial system and has been reported—privately for fear of retaliation—by judges and prosecutors, including very senior members of the judiciary, consistently for many years," he wrote.
"It’s a sad fact that a climate of fear and retribution in Cambodia means that people are often only willing to provide information confidentially."
Rights Watch said in its Tuesday statement that the tribunal had been staffed with Cambodians loyal to Prime Minister Hun Sen, Cabinet Minister Sok An, and National Police Chief Hok Lundy.
The organization also claimed that government officials had instructed the Cambodian ECCC members at last month's plenary session to delay the adoption of crucial internal rules, without which a trial cannot proceed.
"Knowing the society, including the history of this regime, and the history of the tribunal from its inception, I think Human Rights Watch is on key in its statement," said Theary Seng, executive director of the Center for Social Development.
"The Cambodian Bar Association wouldn't be this vocal and insistent if they didn't have some political backing from higher up," she said.
Hok Lundy and ECCC Supreme Court judge Kong Srim could not be reached for comment.
Adhoc, Licadho and the Open Society Justice Initiative stopped short of endorsing Rights Watch's statement in their comments on the failure of the plenary session.
"When Ky Tech didn't allow Suon Visal to be the president of the Bar Association, we were worried," Licadho President Kek Galabru said.
"When he was re-elected we were worried. Now, when he obstructs the training, we are more worried. But we cannot be sure. We cannot accuse the government. We don't have proof she added.
Nor, she said, does she enjoy the immunity that Rights Watch, as a foreign organization, does in Cambodia.
Adhoc President Thun Saray said that the progress of the tribunal will prove whether Rights Watch's claims are correct.
"If there is no acceleration, it means it’s an intentional delay," Thun Saray said. But he added, "It's too early to tell."
1 comment:
Asking for evidence? You and your superiors are evidence for all to see. Those international organisations act as a mirror behind you so that you can see your own filthy butts.
These Cambodian officials react to the criticism of the international institutes the same way as they do with the local organisations. Except, with the international organisations they cannot just send their hitmen to finish the job.
Post a Comment