HONG KONG, Sep. 19LAO MONG HAY
Posted at UPI Asia Online
Column: Rule by Fear
In August there was a flurry of statements from the Cambodian government and other state institutions to affirm and defend former King Sihanouk's immunity from any court order to appear in the Khmer Rouge Tribunal as a defendant or a witness.
This tribunal is a mixed panel comprising Cambodian judges and international judges supplied by the United Nations. It has been set up and functions under Cambodian law to try the Khmer Rouge leaders most responsible for the crimes committed under their rule, between 1975 and 1979.
Sihanouk was head of state of the Khmer Rouge regime until 1976 and, as such, he has been held by many Cambodians to share responsibility for those crimes. Some of those Cambodians have requested that he be stripped of immunity so that he could appear in court.
The Cambodian government sensed the real possibility that the tribunal might issue an order for him to appear. This possibility was later implied by the tribunal's U.N. deputy administrator in a letter of reply to Sihanouk's call on that tribunal to talk with him over his role and association with the Khmer Rouge. The letter said that "only the tribunal's judges are to decide who should appear as a witness." In order to eliminate that possibility, the government issued a threat that "Cambodia will kick out the Khmer Rouge Tribunal if it brings great, valorous King Sihanouk to trial."
That threat is yet another testimony that the Cambodian government is controlling the judiciary, including the tribunal. Sihanouk himself confirmed this government control in his open letter in English, dated Sept. 1, to that tribunal. In the letter he said that he "will not accept to give up the royal immunity ... unless the International Court of The Hague is given the responsibility of judging [him] and, eventually, sentencing [him] to prison." He emphatically added that he did not accept "to be judged by the Khmers [Cambodians] because there is only an indefinitely small number of independent, neutral and impartial Khmers."
The government exercises this control through the judges' membership in the ruling party, the Cambodian People's Party or CPP. This is a former communist party whose discipline and control have remained as strong as ever. The government also controls the judiciary through its open and discrete action against judges.
In May 2006 the Cambodian administrator of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal held a press conference to announce the appointment of judges and prosecutors on that tribunal. Among the questions posed was one about the party affiliations of the judicial officers, Cambodian and international. There was no straight answer to that question, but the next day Prime Minister Hun Sen publicly blasted the author of that question, calling him a "perverted sex-crazed animal" for raising the issue of the Cambodian judges' membership in the CPP, which the government has not denied, and their lack of independence.
Among the open and direct measures to control the judiciary can be cited the much publicized "iron fist" policy Hun Sen introduced in 2004, whcih was allegedly aimed at ridding the judiciary of corruption. A few judges and other judicial officers were then tried, but were acquitted later for lack of evidence.
That was enough to instill fear among all judges and prosecutors across the country, however. This drastic measure followed Hun Sen's 1999 order to rearrest people released by the courts in defiance of the principle of res judicata, or double jeopardy. That measure was allegedly aimed at combating crimes.
The United Nations, which has assisted Cambodia in the creation and running of the tribunal, is not unfamiliar with this political control of the judiciary. The U.N. secretary-general's successive special envoys for human rights in Cambodia since 1993 have all known about it and have tried in vain to wean the judiciary from such control.
In 1998, at the Cambodian government's request, three U.N. experts were appointed to explore the feasibility of a Khmer Rouge trial. In its field study of the judiciary in Cambodia in 1999, the group discovered, among other things, this political control. Together with the other drawbacks it had discovered, the group came up with a conclusion that "domestic trials organized under Cambodian law are not feasible and should not be supported financially by the United Nations."
The United Nations ignored that recommendation, however, and went ahead with its assistance to the tribunal and trials under Cambodian law. Now the issue of former King Sihanouk's immunity has put the tribunal under the spotlight of political control. No Khmer Rouge leader has been in the dock as yet, and it is a big question mark whether this Cambodian-U.N. tribunal can effectively free itself from political control, function as an independent court, and meet an expectation, among many others, that it will serve as a catalyst for the independence of the Cambodian justice system.
--
(Lao Mong Hay is currently a senior researcher at the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong. He was previously director of the Khmer Institute of Democracy in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, and a visiting professor at the University of Toronto in 2003. In 1997, he received an award from Human Rights Watch and the Nansen Medal in 2000 from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.)
This tribunal is a mixed panel comprising Cambodian judges and international judges supplied by the United Nations. It has been set up and functions under Cambodian law to try the Khmer Rouge leaders most responsible for the crimes committed under their rule, between 1975 and 1979.
Sihanouk was head of state of the Khmer Rouge regime until 1976 and, as such, he has been held by many Cambodians to share responsibility for those crimes. Some of those Cambodians have requested that he be stripped of immunity so that he could appear in court.
The Cambodian government sensed the real possibility that the tribunal might issue an order for him to appear. This possibility was later implied by the tribunal's U.N. deputy administrator in a letter of reply to Sihanouk's call on that tribunal to talk with him over his role and association with the Khmer Rouge. The letter said that "only the tribunal's judges are to decide who should appear as a witness." In order to eliminate that possibility, the government issued a threat that "Cambodia will kick out the Khmer Rouge Tribunal if it brings great, valorous King Sihanouk to trial."
That threat is yet another testimony that the Cambodian government is controlling the judiciary, including the tribunal. Sihanouk himself confirmed this government control in his open letter in English, dated Sept. 1, to that tribunal. In the letter he said that he "will not accept to give up the royal immunity ... unless the International Court of The Hague is given the responsibility of judging [him] and, eventually, sentencing [him] to prison." He emphatically added that he did not accept "to be judged by the Khmers [Cambodians] because there is only an indefinitely small number of independent, neutral and impartial Khmers."
The government exercises this control through the judges' membership in the ruling party, the Cambodian People's Party or CPP. This is a former communist party whose discipline and control have remained as strong as ever. The government also controls the judiciary through its open and discrete action against judges.
In May 2006 the Cambodian administrator of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal held a press conference to announce the appointment of judges and prosecutors on that tribunal. Among the questions posed was one about the party affiliations of the judicial officers, Cambodian and international. There was no straight answer to that question, but the next day Prime Minister Hun Sen publicly blasted the author of that question, calling him a "perverted sex-crazed animal" for raising the issue of the Cambodian judges' membership in the CPP, which the government has not denied, and their lack of independence.
Among the open and direct measures to control the judiciary can be cited the much publicized "iron fist" policy Hun Sen introduced in 2004, whcih was allegedly aimed at ridding the judiciary of corruption. A few judges and other judicial officers were then tried, but were acquitted later for lack of evidence.
That was enough to instill fear among all judges and prosecutors across the country, however. This drastic measure followed Hun Sen's 1999 order to rearrest people released by the courts in defiance of the principle of res judicata, or double jeopardy. That measure was allegedly aimed at combating crimes.
The United Nations, which has assisted Cambodia in the creation and running of the tribunal, is not unfamiliar with this political control of the judiciary. The U.N. secretary-general's successive special envoys for human rights in Cambodia since 1993 have all known about it and have tried in vain to wean the judiciary from such control.
In 1998, at the Cambodian government's request, three U.N. experts were appointed to explore the feasibility of a Khmer Rouge trial. In its field study of the judiciary in Cambodia in 1999, the group discovered, among other things, this political control. Together with the other drawbacks it had discovered, the group came up with a conclusion that "domestic trials organized under Cambodian law are not feasible and should not be supported financially by the United Nations."
The United Nations ignored that recommendation, however, and went ahead with its assistance to the tribunal and trials under Cambodian law. Now the issue of former King Sihanouk's immunity has put the tribunal under the spotlight of political control. No Khmer Rouge leader has been in the dock as yet, and it is a big question mark whether this Cambodian-U.N. tribunal can effectively free itself from political control, function as an independent court, and meet an expectation, among many others, that it will serve as a catalyst for the independence of the Cambodian justice system.
--
(Lao Mong Hay is currently a senior researcher at the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong. He was previously director of the Khmer Institute of Democracy in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, and a visiting professor at the University of Toronto in 2003. In 1997, he received an award from Human Rights Watch and the Nansen Medal in 2000 from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.)
12 comments:
If anyone looks for 100% justice the Khmer Rouge tribunal is not going to come close. The person has to go to heaven to find justice. Even God may not be perfect.
It depends on each person's own view. 70% acceptable, or 80 or higher.
It is odd to read someone like
LAO MONG HAY who holds a real degree PhD not a fake one like PM Hun Sen to made such remarks and expecting the KRT to be fair knowing the KRT is under the XKhmer Rouge (Vietnamese Faction) rules the country. The King himself also expressed his concern that the KRT is not fair if it is in Cambodia, it is fair if the trial is at outside (International Court). The King will testify if it is not in Cambodia.
So what if the UN is part and helping to set up this trial? It didn't work in 1993 while the UN allowed Hun Sen to keep arm forces when he lost the election and let him share the power why it works now?
Dr. LAO MONG HAY, you are an idiot.
Were you not one of the Khmer Rouge or were you not the one who supported the Khmer Rouge before to oust the Viet Cong?
Is it something along the line you are looking for yourself taht is why you pretend to have teh KRT SHOW in Cambodia and complaining it may not be fair? How can it be fair if it is under the XKhmer Rouge control?
Regardless if he should be convicted or not is not another issue.
The major reason I believe that he should be trial is for the truth to come out. An Eyewitness to the crime is an Eyeswitness period. So that is why he should be trial like anyone else.
The destruction of khmer and cambodia is too great to let any evidence escape.
During the halacause. About 6 million jews was killed. Until this day, I heard rumor that there are mercsionary out there to get any former nazi memeber.
So to have a fear trial which is long past due is atleast a " must " . The former king shouldn't stand against it period. He mentioned in the past that he would love to tell the world the truth. So, why changes his mind now ?
Regardless if he should be convicted or not is not another issue.
The major reason I believe that he should be trial is for the truth to come out. An Eyewitness to the crime is an Eyeswitness period. So that is why he should be trial like anyone else.
The destruction of khmer and cambodia is too great to let any evidence escape.
During the halacause. About 6 million jews was killed. Until this day, I heard rumor that there are mercsionary out there to get any former nazi memeber.
So to have a fear trial which is long past due is atleast a " must " . The former king shouldn't stand against it period. He mentioned in the past that he would love to tell the world the truth. So, why changes his mind now ?
Please do not exciting folks UN will know what they are doing,look at the Panama the guy who lead that country he got on the stand in USA he finished it now they found him guilty in Europe and now he is in Europe jail.
All true Khmer compatriots, ladies and gentlemen,
Cambodia has cancers that were embedded into her by China+YUONS+Vietminh-CPP-Hun Sen+all royal crooks through traitor Sihanouk's flesh and blood, also through his YUON wife Monique and Sihanouk’s clique.
To have true and lasting peace for Cambodia these cancers have to be removed once and for all, either by the law of ECCC-KRT or by any means, as long as the majority of true Khmers agree with it.
If these cancers remain inside Cambodia, without proper treatment, YUONS will continue to swallow us bit by bit every day and China will gobble the whole region without mercy toward Cambodian land and all Khmer people. They will achieve this with the continued assistance of NORODOM SIHANOUK and HUN SEN.
KULEN MONOROM
(the rice farmer's son)
The trail needs to be televised world wide. We want to be able to see and hear everything.
Please UN, you need to campagne for another $ 56 miilions to make it happens, if that what you really want to teach the next irriresponsible and cruelty leaders like ours. Thank you
Ah Yuon kantorb Kulen. Can you stop your insanity before you may kill everyone in your housewhole. Ah runteass banh niss ott ban kar mane.
The UN know what they are doing?
If so why not having the trial at an International Court instead inside Cambodia?
5:54 Am, you are an idiot. Why compare Cambodia to Panama, when Cambodia is under tigh control by Viet Communist and China?
Who is going to dare to testify the truth? Noun Chea sai he will but when he gets there he won't.
If he does want to tell the truth, his whole family members will drink poison water or be killed.
At least his wife opended a little bit who encroached into Cambodia.
Pretty soon she will be getting sick from a heart attack then die if she keeps taking more about who were behind.
Dr. Lao Mong Hay is an idiot and you are 100 times idiot.
Mr.1:21AM
Thank you very much for your interest in my commentary.
Please read my letter published in Far Eastern Economic Review of 27 March 1986, reproduced below, to know more about me and my position vis-à-vis the Khmer Rouge. And I have never swayed from this position ever since.
In 1996, when I accompanied him on a visit to Germany and at a time when our then two-prime minister government was considering amnesty for Ieng Sary, I requested H.E. Sar Kheng, now Deputy Prime Minister in charge of the Ministry of Interior, not to agree with that amnesty. To support my request I told him, among other things, that “when shaking hands with any Khmer Rouge official as I had had to do during the peace process, had hurt my heart.”
“Nuremberg formula
Sukhumbhand Paribatra’s peace plan for Cambodia [Review, 6 Mar.] seems to hinge on the elimination of the Khmer Rouge from the negotiation process and from Cambodian politics in order to ensure that there would be no Cambodian forces “hostile” to Vietnam. As a Cambodian, I think there is a better and more civilized way of disposing of these hated Khmer Rouge and ensuring a long-lasting peace.
It would be better for the countries to which his plan is addressed, to use their leverage to set up an international court of human rights modelled on the Nuremberg court, to try and punish perpetrators of crimes against the Cambodians instead.
This court should be made permanent to prevent the rebirth of any evil forces in the form of repressive regimes which, according to past experience, could not only destroy Cambodian society but also hostile to the neigbouring countries.
As the events in Indochina of the past 30 years have testified, the peace that various international settlements had meant to secure has invariably been destroyed by these evil forces. It is very doubtful whether Sukhumbhand’s proposed settlement of the Cambodia could achieve anything, if at all, beyond a mere truce.
Gwynedd, Wales Lao Mong Hay”
Note: (1)Sukhumbhand Paribatra is a member of the Thai Royal Family. He was at that time a prominent academic.
(2) Perhaps, I was among the first Cambodians,if not the first Cambodian, who proposed the setting-up of an international Nuremberg-styled tribunal to try the Khmer Rouge.
LAO Mong Hay, Brother of two victims of the Khmer Rouge
Hong Kong
Mr. Mong SAY
You are not welcome to speak on behalf Cambodia... because you are not Khmer!
Golden Star
Comrade Golden Star, please enlighten us as to what criteria one can use when speaking out against evil?
Maybe you could provide links where we all can see your work and effort in finding justice for those innocent Khmers who were brutally killed by the KR.
Dr. Loa Mong Hay did his part, now can we see your? It very important to us that you show us how truly Khmer you are.
Post a Comment