Reactions to AHRC statement on King-Father's immunity03 September 2007
By Huy Vannak
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
A Hong-Kong-based human rights organization (Asian Human Rights Commission) issued a statement of Monday, calling the Cambodian government, the National Assembly, the Senate, and all political parties not to attempt to defend former King Sihanouk's immunity from prosecution by the Khmer Rouge Tribunal.
In its statement, AHRC said that the Cambodian Constitution protects the reigning king only. AHRC added that the Law on the Titles and Privileges of the Former King and Queen of Cambodia that was promulgated on October 29, 2004 does not protect former King Sihanouk's immunity from prosecution.
Regarding AHRC’s statement, as well as other demands requesting the removal of King-Father’s immunity, SRP MP Son Chhay proposed an amendment to the constitution in order to clarify the protection of the privileges of the former king.
Son Chhay said: “There is an interdiction regarding the former monarch, this law was ratified outside of the constitution, therefore, in my opinion, in order to guarantee and protect so that such requests could no longer be made, the National Assembly should amend the (constitution) article about the privileges of the king, and extend these privileges to the former monarch as well, in order to resolve this issue.”
In reaction to AHRC statement, Khieu Kanharith, the spokesman for the government, said: “This human rights group is dumb, they don’t want to look at the entire article, if they don’t even know how to read the law yet, why do they talk? The Cambodian constitution protects the reigning king, but the conferring (to King Sihanouk of) the title of ‘Great Valorous King’ is the decision of the Parliament, it’s the most important. If they are so lazy, they shouldn’t talk too much so they wouldn’t be ashamed, unlike the true human rights organizations (would have done).”
Funcinpec MP Monh Saphan said that he is defending the Hero-King also.
On 20 August, the Cambodian Action Committee for Justice and Equity (CACJE) sent a letter to Heng Samrin, National Assembly president, asking him to hold a plenary session of the National Assembly to remove the immunity of the former monarch, King Norodom Sihanouk.
On 30 August, the Hero-King issued a letter through his website in which he invited the foreign officials of the KR Tribunal to come and meet him so that he can reveal to these officials, the events which took place under the KR regime.
Nevertheless, Peter Foster, a KRT official, indicated today that the ECCC could not comment on this issue because it has not yet received the official letter from the former monarch.
In its statement, AHRC said that the Cambodian Constitution protects the reigning king only. AHRC added that the Law on the Titles and Privileges of the Former King and Queen of Cambodia that was promulgated on October 29, 2004 does not protect former King Sihanouk's immunity from prosecution.
Regarding AHRC’s statement, as well as other demands requesting the removal of King-Father’s immunity, SRP MP Son Chhay proposed an amendment to the constitution in order to clarify the protection of the privileges of the former king.
Son Chhay said: “There is an interdiction regarding the former monarch, this law was ratified outside of the constitution, therefore, in my opinion, in order to guarantee and protect so that such requests could no longer be made, the National Assembly should amend the (constitution) article about the privileges of the king, and extend these privileges to the former monarch as well, in order to resolve this issue.”
In reaction to AHRC statement, Khieu Kanharith, the spokesman for the government, said: “This human rights group is dumb, they don’t want to look at the entire article, if they don’t even know how to read the law yet, why do they talk? The Cambodian constitution protects the reigning king, but the conferring (to King Sihanouk of) the title of ‘Great Valorous King’ is the decision of the Parliament, it’s the most important. If they are so lazy, they shouldn’t talk too much so they wouldn’t be ashamed, unlike the true human rights organizations (would have done).”
Funcinpec MP Monh Saphan said that he is defending the Hero-King also.
On 20 August, the Cambodian Action Committee for Justice and Equity (CACJE) sent a letter to Heng Samrin, National Assembly president, asking him to hold a plenary session of the National Assembly to remove the immunity of the former monarch, King Norodom Sihanouk.
On 30 August, the Hero-King issued a letter through his website in which he invited the foreign officials of the KR Tribunal to come and meet him so that he can reveal to these officials, the events which took place under the KR regime.
Nevertheless, Peter Foster, a KRT official, indicated today that the ECCC could not comment on this issue because it has not yet received the official letter from the former monarch.
8 comments:
In reality, it is the Minister himself who is the most dum person on earth. This constitution has not been approved by a referendum. Therefore this constitution is only a draft ready for referendum. Even the present monarchy is being installed by Hun Sen not by the people of Cambodia. In this legal point of view, any immunity offered by the government is not valided as the constitution is also a draft one.
Hun Sen and it regime acting to protect it monarchy that is so wrong and lying please do not believe that , instead it protect Hanoi and himself, if he doesn't act that way he won't be able to stay in the next term of prime minister because who got the scholar ship
read next
in 1977 to 79 yuon commandos were drop in Phnom Penh at night time by youn helicopters ,any one went to Soviet to study in 1980-85 will hear youn speak khmer that they do this to kick khmer rouge out or to swllow Cambodia please help to provide the in fo. it important
C'mon,sdach just go to court and be done with it.Had you not joint the khmer rouge in the first place, you may be go down in history as one of the most beloved and revered khmer's king of all time just like the Thai's king .Khmer rouge killed millions lives and you were in it from the start , that's why you can't escape it.The more you refuse ,the serious people suspect of you.In their view ,You were an accomplice of the massacre.Well, accept the consequences of your bizarre policies .Cambodia was a kingdom under you , you were a prince and you loved communist, what an odd?.The first king in human history who was so cozy with Communist.
Beside the issue of having the King Father called at the ECCC, the legal side is with the government, and Anonymous, I don't know what kind of legal expert you're, but the constitution doesnt have to be approved by referundum, it has been voted by the parliement, which do represent the people. Indeed, some countries do use the referundum to approve the constitution, but this isnt mandatory at all. You should review your law.
Hello missir 2:25PM.
The parliament can legislate some laws presented by any member of parliament. But for the constitution, Referendum is a must. Lon Nol has offered two referendum between 1970-1975.
-one Referendum to change the regime from Monarchy to Republic.
-A second Referendum was to approve a draft constitution for the Republic. Lon Nol was blamed by Sihanouk and Sihanoukishs as facist and Dictatorship, but he has respected the right og all Cambodian people with regard to change law and regime.
Without a Referendum this Constitution is still a draft. People can change anything they like before referendum. Members of Parliament cannot hijack this right of the People. I am not a lawyer but I have been candidate for foreign paliamentarien election many times.
"But for the constitution, Referendum is a must." maybe, but this isn't an obligation. Some regimes do rule through referendum or plebiscite, some don't. Saying "without a referendum the constitution is still a draft" isn't right legally speaking.
I do not speak politics here but law.
I almost appreciate the comments and the interpretations made by AHRC. However, one should note that if AHRC is to consider the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia to be supreme to any other legislation in Cambodia without taking account of the stability, social, economic and political coherence and peace in Cambodia, I would like to take this opportunity to counter the AHRC arguments.
1. In the statement, AHRC stated that the law conferring special privilege upon the King was unconstitutional, and mentioned: ‘the tribunal should challenge the constitutionality of this immunity at the Constitutional Council of Cambodia’. I would say that AHRC should read again the Constitution on article 141 which states that only the King, the President of the Senate, the President of the National Assembly, the Prime Minister, ¼ of members of Senate, 1/10 of members of National Assembly or the Courts may request the Constitutional Council to review the constitutionality of passed law. Furthermore, in the same article, Khmer Citizens shall have the right to appeal against the constitutionality of any law through their representative or President of National Assembly or member of the Senate or President of the Senate, etc. Since there is unanimous consensus among all political parties (CPP, FUNCIPEC, and SRP) -- including other of the Senate, the National Assembly, the Prime Ministry, etc. -- the challenge for the unconstitutionality is not feasible and is, therefore, just a dream. The request by AHRC to have the ECCC to challenge the constitutionality of the above law is not reasonable and if it is so, it possibility to realize is unlikely to happen. Thus let the Constitutional Council of Cambodia play its roles as the interpreter of the constitutionality upon requested by those right persons (the King, Senate President, etc.), not the AHRC.
2. Again, it is wise to consider that the ECCC is born thank to the Agreement between the UN and the RGC (Royal Government of Cambodia) concerning the Prosecution under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed during the Period of Democratic Kampuchea dated 03 June 2003. The Agreement states clearly that the General Assembly of the UN recognizes the legitimate concern of the RGC and the Cambodian people in the pursuit of justice and national reconciliation, stability, peace and security. The interpretation of any rules or laws arising from the agreement should be in consistency with its intent which is the national reconciliation, stability and peace in Cambodia. This is what the vast majority of Cambodians want, not few people who cite or make petition or statement here.
3. On merits, Samdech Sihanouk, who has been widely accepted by general Cambodians as a hero, should not be summoned to the ECCC. This merits stems from the fact that Samdech Sihanouk used to be the King of Cambodia who to enjoy the full privilege for his entire life as stated and guaranteed by the article 7 of the Constitution and as rightly pointed out also by AHRC. Therefore, a person who had resigned himself from being the King for entire life just for the sake of the continuity, stability and peace in Cambodia deserves high respect, admiration and reward rather than prosecution. One should agree that without his abdication, no politicians particularly care about the continuity of the throne and monarchy in Cambodia as proved by the fact that the law on the throne council had not been adopted at that time. This means that if Samdech would, in any case, passes away -- we don’t know when as this is of human nature-- Cambodia faces greatly potential danger without the King and the new constitution would need to be drafted. The dramatic and substantial changes in the Constitution, especially the regime, would lead to chaotic political situation and dilemma, not to mention war. Again, Cambodian people and particularly the poor would certainly suffer from this.
4. The AHRC suggests further that trials in Cambodia are no longer conducted in the name of the King, but "in the name of the Cambodian people". Again, the Agreement between the UN and the RGC concerning the Prosecution under Cambodian Law is the founder of the tribunal. From the name of the Agreement, one can know that the prosecution is under the Cambodian Law. Whatever it is, it would be conducted in accordance with the rules and customs of Cambodia.
monyrath
Post a Comment