By Anne-Laure Poirée
Cambodge Soir
Translated from French by Luc Sâr
In the general opinion of civil society representatives, the longer the ECCC delays in the adoption of the internal rule, the more it is taxing the trial as the ECCC are financed for three years and so far, six months have passed…
The appeasement strategy
In December, the divergence between the ECCC Cambodian and International judges was not a secret to anyone. Their disagreements on essential points of the internal rules led them to delay their adoption to the next plenary assembly. The reasons invoked for the deadlock stem from problems related to the understanding of problems at the base, to communication problems, and according to some, to a real Cambodian strategy aimed at slowing down the process in order to limit the number of people charged. “The Cambodians are fighting each others on what is under their hands,” Hisham Moussar, Adhoc NGO coordinator on Khmer Rouge affair, said. For Heather Ryan, the ECCC observer for Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI), both Cambodian and foreign judges have all the means to block the process at one point in time or another. “This comes from the ECCC structure which is conceived in such a way that all parties are forced to cooperate. Consequently, in principle, the opportunities to delay the trial are not lacking. Each time there will be a disagreement between the national and international [judges], the issue of the ECCC credibility will come up.”
Robert Petit, co-prosecutor, wants to reassure: “It’s true that there were discussions, communication or approach problems, but in itself, there is nothing original there. In all tribunals, there are problems of interpretation and there are negotiations. This tribunal is clad with a particular issue, but I remain relatively optimistic. There is nothing that is unsolvable. We all agree, we all want the trial to take place.” A position that is defended by Chea Sim, CPP President, who in his speech celebrating the 7 Jan 1979 victory over the Khmer Rouge, as well as by Prime Minister Hun Sen who expressed it during the inauguration of the Bun Rany Hun Sen Memot high school in Kompong Cham. “We must charge them to provide justice to the victims, and so that it may serve as a warning to all those who are in power so that they no longer perpetrate this type of brutality,” Hun Sen declared.
Who is doing what?
Peter Foster, ECCC spokesman, affirms that within the administration, as well as for the prosecutors and investigators, every one is working on these issues. The examining co-judges are working full time on the internal rules until the meeting of the drafting committee on 15 Jan. As for the ECCC judges, they currently assume their role of judges while waiting to be summoned by the Chambers. “On the prosecutors’ side, there’s a lot of work, they can continue. What is stopped, is the examining [judges],” Heather Ryan said, she also advises patience. “Regarding the rhythm of the process, we have nothing to envy other tribunals,” Robert Petit insisted. “We all work with the premises that this is a short term tribunal. Given the witnesses, the victims, the age of those who lived under the Khmer Rouge regime, we have a particular deadline. The objective is limited to three years, maybe four. We do not have the luxury that other tribunals have to be able to last.”
No charges brought before the adoption of the [internal] rule
In case of blocking of the internal rules, the co-prosecutors could, according to some observers, bring charges before the rules are adopted in order to show that the process nevertheless moves forward, and also to force the adoption the rules. But the co-prosecutors refuse to take this option before the plenary assembly in March. Theoretically, nothing is preventing them to do so, but, “given the state of national law and international standards,” Robert Petit said, “we need internal rules. The more there are certainties, i.e. detailed and appropriate rules, the less problem there will be.” Most of all, he insisted on the reach of such decision: “a process set in motion which is engaging the witnesses, the victims ... There must be some responsibility.”
The appeasement strategy
In December, the divergence between the ECCC Cambodian and International judges was not a secret to anyone. Their disagreements on essential points of the internal rules led them to delay their adoption to the next plenary assembly. The reasons invoked for the deadlock stem from problems related to the understanding of problems at the base, to communication problems, and according to some, to a real Cambodian strategy aimed at slowing down the process in order to limit the number of people charged. “The Cambodians are fighting each others on what is under their hands,” Hisham Moussar, Adhoc NGO coordinator on Khmer Rouge affair, said. For Heather Ryan, the ECCC observer for Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI), both Cambodian and foreign judges have all the means to block the process at one point in time or another. “This comes from the ECCC structure which is conceived in such a way that all parties are forced to cooperate. Consequently, in principle, the opportunities to delay the trial are not lacking. Each time there will be a disagreement between the national and international [judges], the issue of the ECCC credibility will come up.”
Robert Petit, co-prosecutor, wants to reassure: “It’s true that there were discussions, communication or approach problems, but in itself, there is nothing original there. In all tribunals, there are problems of interpretation and there are negotiations. This tribunal is clad with a particular issue, but I remain relatively optimistic. There is nothing that is unsolvable. We all agree, we all want the trial to take place.” A position that is defended by Chea Sim, CPP President, who in his speech celebrating the 7 Jan 1979 victory over the Khmer Rouge, as well as by Prime Minister Hun Sen who expressed it during the inauguration of the Bun Rany Hun Sen Memot high school in Kompong Cham. “We must charge them to provide justice to the victims, and so that it may serve as a warning to all those who are in power so that they no longer perpetrate this type of brutality,” Hun Sen declared.
Who is doing what?
Peter Foster, ECCC spokesman, affirms that within the administration, as well as for the prosecutors and investigators, every one is working on these issues. The examining co-judges are working full time on the internal rules until the meeting of the drafting committee on 15 Jan. As for the ECCC judges, they currently assume their role of judges while waiting to be summoned by the Chambers. “On the prosecutors’ side, there’s a lot of work, they can continue. What is stopped, is the examining [judges],” Heather Ryan said, she also advises patience. “Regarding the rhythm of the process, we have nothing to envy other tribunals,” Robert Petit insisted. “We all work with the premises that this is a short term tribunal. Given the witnesses, the victims, the age of those who lived under the Khmer Rouge regime, we have a particular deadline. The objective is limited to three years, maybe four. We do not have the luxury that other tribunals have to be able to last.”
No charges brought before the adoption of the [internal] rule
In case of blocking of the internal rules, the co-prosecutors could, according to some observers, bring charges before the rules are adopted in order to show that the process nevertheless moves forward, and also to force the adoption the rules. But the co-prosecutors refuse to take this option before the plenary assembly in March. Theoretically, nothing is preventing them to do so, but, “given the state of national law and international standards,” Robert Petit said, “we need internal rules. The more there are certainties, i.e. detailed and appropriate rules, the less problem there will be.” Most of all, he insisted on the reach of such decision: “a process set in motion which is engaging the witnesses, the victims ... There must be some responsibility.”
No comments:
Post a Comment