Sunday, October 07, 2007

Big Brother state of Cambodia: You may demonstrate only if ...

A draft law for the right to demonstrate under study

05-10-2007
By Leang Delux
Cambodge Soir

Translated from French by Luc Sâr

The government has concocted as draft law “clarifying the procedures for the organization of demonstrations.”

The Council of Ministers adopted on Friday 05 October the draft law on non-violent demonstrations. The draft law which contains 30 articles was written by the Ministry of interior, as a consequence of the Cambodian Constitution which assures the right to strike, the right to non-violent demonstrations, the freedom of expression and assembly by the citizens. According to Khieu Kanharith, government spokesman, the “new draft law is better than the old one. All the procedure is detailed.” Therefore, according to the law, the demonstrators must submit a request for authorization from the authorities involved in view of the organization of a demonstration. To this request, the authorities must give the green light before the demonstration is allowed to take place. The demonstrations are systematically prohibited on holydays, such as the birthday of the king, the National Independence day, the water festivals, etc… Furthermore, demonstrations will not be authorized if the authorities believe that, clearly, the assembly planned could be a source for public unrests. “Six months after the adoption of the law, the cities and provinces must set aside a specific location for these potentials demonstrations. If less than 200 people must assemble, there will be no need to ask for an authorization,” Khieu Kanharith explained.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sounds fair enough to me.

And I like to re-articulate: No intruding on other People Constitutional Rights. You got that?

Anonymous said...

It does sound like this ,if we don't like what are you going to say or to do then no demonstration.

Anonymous said...

close, but not exactly, you're free to demonstrate, but when your demonstration effecting traffic (keeping people from getting to work), destroying public property, ..., that is no no. Get it?

Anonymous said...

Great!
It is good to see that laws for each particular ministry can be created by its council,it is a step of the right direction to collective democracy.

Hope this practice can pave the way to organisation and sub organisation to develop rules, policy manuals for transparency of work practice where elective councils,law councils can approve the draft between framework of constitutional laws.THIS IS THE DECENTRALISATION WHERE DEMOCRACY IS UPHELD.

REMEMBER THAT LAW IS SAFETY MECHANISM BETWEEN TWO ENTITIES,THE POWERFUL AND THE POWERLESS FOR INDIVIDUAL,MUTUAL AND SOCIAL BENEFITS.

Khmer Soth

Anonymous said...

This law is only good for a democratic country where we are sure that nobody will be killed during the demonstration.

Anonymous said...

This law is just the paper. I do not believe this law because we have a good constitution but it is the paper also. The government does not care about the law but care about the words through state TVK of the PM. wait and see the real application.

Anonymous said...

big flat liar, big flat liar, big flat liar, big flat liar, big flat liar, big flat liar, big flat liar, big flat liar, big liar

Anonymous said...

AH Khieu Kanharith had been preaching Vietcong high culture for years to keep Khmer people from saying anything regarding their freedom of expression and even if he passed this fucken law and the Khmer Leu, Khmer Kandal, and Khmer Krom people will continue to suffer for the lack of freedom because his high culture Vietcong's law is subject to interpretation! Now there are a million way to interpret any damn law!

So please step forward to exercise your freedom of expression if you want to be the first victim of AH HUN SEN Vietcong puppet oppression! I wouldn’t believe this Vietcong slave mother fucker!

Anonymous said...

Hey, if you don't believe it, you can test it out. Just remember not to intrude on other people rights. Stay away from business area at all cost. Merchants often are not thrill with demonstrators, ...,

Anonymous said...

I dont believe that this Laws will be working at all because if you read the meaning as written that, "Furthermore, demonstrations will not be authorized if the authorities believe that, clearly, the assembly planned could be a source for public unrests." It just like the 1991 demonstration law. People have been prohibited by such a spirit of law. How can a laws based on a person (authority) consideration? Law is law. It must state explicitly to what extens and rights they can perform, but not base on someone's agreement. On the other hand, most of CPP authority will never support the spirit of demonstration and they will SAY NO NO ... to it no matter what it causes.

Anonymous said...

What?

That look like a perfect law to me.

It is fair to everyone. You can't create social unrest and destroyed public property like 1991. It cost the tax payers, tens of thousands to restore everything.

Anyhow, if you insist on destroying public property and causing injuries, that is no problem either. Just leave some deposit with the authority. That way, they can use it to restore the damage, okay?

Anonymous said...

To 2:23PM Fool!

What you have said is based on your interpretation of the Vietcong high culture law! Don't you see mother fucker! The CPP Vietcong slave clan can interpret the fuck law just like you to prevent any peaceful demonstration not in their interest!

There are those peaceful demonstrations too but you mother fucker never a give a thought about it! Why are you so bias mother fucker! Just to have a peaceful demonstration and it cost the tax payers money too and where the fuck did you get that idea from?

The only violent demonstration that I had seen so far is when AH HUN SEN Vietcong slave sends his thugs and gangsters to create chaos and to make innocence peaceful Khmer people demonstrators look uncivilized in front of international community!

Anonymous said...

Oh, cut the bullshit, you know fair well we are not the only one who interpret laws in our interest. There are many people in the US who had been arrested for demonstrating against the Iraq war. Here's a couple links:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9493139/

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070916/D8RMHE100.html

Anonymous said...

Now BUllshit yourself 4:16PM, comparing Hun Sen Viet Commy regime to that of the U.S. That's DUNG cow!

Anonymous said...

To 4:16PM

Don't compare orange and apple!

Anonymous said...

Well, I don't see no difference, 6:00/7. When the US were in Vietnam, They ate a lot of cow's dung.

Anonymous said...

To the organizers,

I see a loop hole. One can demonstrated w/o authorization whatever the # maybe (200, 2,000, 20,000, 200,000, etc), just simply separating the picket line by proximity villages or define distance by law. Also, it seems unlikely that KK will approve anything anyway. A fake democracy can't be trusted.

Anonymous said...

6:22 PM, you are a fool and ignorant Viet. The USA had politically lost the War, it is people like you and the dead uncle Ho that kept fooling themselves that losing so many Viet lives and putting the country backward at least 30 years in term of progress was a victory. Now, you are fooling around in every post spewing that the US is monster this and monster that, but your economy and many of your people are benefitting from either being in America or having trade connection with America. It is 2007, so drop Vietcong and Ho's mentality.

Anonymous said...

You are so pathetic, 10:21. lost is lost. politically, militarily, or diplomatically makes no difference.

As for trade with the US, it is a win win deal. We make a little money, and many of your people don't have to pay hundreds of dollars just for and underwear and you save more money in the bank, comprendre?

Anonymous said...

Fucken stubborn Vietcong hypocryte! Can't reason with any of them. that was exactly the point, it should be a win-win situation, but you keep on riding on your fucken high Vietcong horse.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, but you try to make it looks like you gave us free lunch, and that is not true, is it?