Serving the People:
Raising the Voices of Cambodian Women
December 2008
MP Mu Sochua walking the campaign trail in summer 2008
Having led my local team to a small victory by bringing in an extra 10,000 votes for my party in less than ten months in 2007, I took the lead in Kampot, one of the 24 provinces in Cambodia, in mid-2008. The back-to-back electoral campaign finally earned me a seat in Parliament in July 2008. As I take time to reflect back on the paths taken on the campaign trail and the promises made during the door-to-door visits to 482 villages, I can only now take a deep breath and look forward to the next five years in my new role as lawmaker and elected representative of the people. None of this could have happened without your continued support for democracy and for a better Cambodia.
MP Mu Sochua discussing issues during door-to-door visits
My party has been working for over a decade to address injustice caused by greed, disrespect for the rule of law, a culture of impunity and corruption that is seriously affecting the lives of the poor. Every year 4,000 Cambodian women die of childbirth. Only 25% of our women deliver their babies at health centers with the assistance of trained midwives, and only 17% of our people have access to clean water. For almost 30 years, the ruling party has told the people to beg for services, while we say to the people that they do not have to beg and that THEY CAN make change by going to the polls.
Forced evictions by soldiers are daily occurrences that terrorize citizens and leave them homeless and destitute. Those evicted most often are female-headed households, which are the most vulnerable to physical attacks and threats or other intimidation tactics. Villagers are now organizing and speaking up, even if they face detention. Women are most vocal.
MP Mu Sochua visits a paralyzed woman denied quality health services
The economic crisis is affecting our construction workers, farmers and garment factory workers, the majority of whom are young rural women. In the meantime, the government increases the budget for defense and national security. As a lawmaker, I argue against these policies and call for more funds for the social sector and access to quality services. As a woman and as a member of the opposition, it is a huge challenge to be vocal knowing that every move I make is recorded and reported.
In the next five years, I hope to bring more young women into politics and to empower the voices of Cambodian women, vital voices, as well as being a part of a grassroots force to make real change. Many grassroots women's movements have inspired me and made me believe that WE CAN.
In closing, I wish to sincerely thank you for believing in me and for being there to make the fight a bit easier.
My real present for Christmas is the joy of being with my three daughters in Kenya. They have all grown to be young women, defining their own beliefs in justice and feminism.
Candles burn brightly for the Sam Rainsy Party and the Cambodian people
I send you my very best wishes, and may 2009 bring you and your loved ones sweet success, good health and great joy.
Mu Sochua
Member of Parliament
Raising the Voices of Cambodian Women
December 2008
MP Mu Sochua walking the campaign trail in summer 2008Having led my local team to a small victory by bringing in an extra 10,000 votes for my party in less than ten months in 2007, I took the lead in Kampot, one of the 24 provinces in Cambodia, in mid-2008. The back-to-back electoral campaign finally earned me a seat in Parliament in July 2008. As I take time to reflect back on the paths taken on the campaign trail and the promises made during the door-to-door visits to 482 villages, I can only now take a deep breath and look forward to the next five years in my new role as lawmaker and elected representative of the people. None of this could have happened without your continued support for democracy and for a better Cambodia.
MP Mu Sochua discussing issues during door-to-door visitsMy party has been working for over a decade to address injustice caused by greed, disrespect for the rule of law, a culture of impunity and corruption that is seriously affecting the lives of the poor. Every year 4,000 Cambodian women die of childbirth. Only 25% of our women deliver their babies at health centers with the assistance of trained midwives, and only 17% of our people have access to clean water. For almost 30 years, the ruling party has told the people to beg for services, while we say to the people that they do not have to beg and that THEY CAN make change by going to the polls.
Forced evictions by soldiers are daily occurrences that terrorize citizens and leave them homeless and destitute. Those evicted most often are female-headed households, which are the most vulnerable to physical attacks and threats or other intimidation tactics. Villagers are now organizing and speaking up, even if they face detention. Women are most vocal.
MP Mu Sochua visits a paralyzed woman denied quality health servicesThe economic crisis is affecting our construction workers, farmers and garment factory workers, the majority of whom are young rural women. In the meantime, the government increases the budget for defense and national security. As a lawmaker, I argue against these policies and call for more funds for the social sector and access to quality services. As a woman and as a member of the opposition, it is a huge challenge to be vocal knowing that every move I make is recorded and reported.
In the next five years, I hope to bring more young women into politics and to empower the voices of Cambodian women, vital voices, as well as being a part of a grassroots force to make real change. Many grassroots women's movements have inspired me and made me believe that WE CAN.
In closing, I wish to sincerely thank you for believing in me and for being there to make the fight a bit easier.
My real present for Christmas is the joy of being with my three daughters in Kenya. They have all grown to be young women, defining their own beliefs in justice and feminism.
Candles burn brightly for the Sam Rainsy Party and the Cambodian peopleI send you my very best wishes, and may 2009 bring you and your loved ones sweet success, good health and great joy.
Mu Sochua
Member of Parliament
13 comments:
Summary of the Summary of the Judgment of 15 June 1962
CASE CONCERNING THE TEMPLE OF PREAH VIHEAR
(MERITS)
Judgment of 15 June 1962
Proceedings in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear, between Cambodia and Thailand, were instituted on 6 October 1959 by an Application of the Government of Cambodia; the Government of Thailand having raised two preliminary objections, the Court, by its Judgment of 26 May 1961, found that it had jurisdiction.
In its Judgment on the merits the Court, by nine votes to three, found that the Temple of Preah Vihear was situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia and, in consequence, that Thailand was under an obligation to withdraw any military or police forces, or other guards or keepers, stationed by her at the Temple, or in its vicinity on Cambodian territory.
By seven votes to five, the Court found that Thailand was under an obligation to restore to Cambodia any sculptures, stelae, fragments of monuments, sandstone model and ancient pottery which might, since the date of the occupation of the Temple by Thailand in 1954, have been removed from the Temple or the Temple area by the Thai authorities.
Judge Tanaka and Judge Morelli appended to the Judgment a Joint Declaration. Vice-President Alfaro and Judge Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice appended Separate Opinions; Judges Moreno Quintana, Wellington Koo and Sir Percy Spender appended Dissenting Opinions.
*
* *
In its Judgment, the Court found that the subject of the dispute was sovereignty over the region of the Temple of Preah Vihear. This ancient sanctuary, partially in ruins, stood on a promontory of the Dangrek range of mountains which constituted the boundary between Cambodia and Thailand. The dispute had its fons et origo in the boundary settlements made in the period 1904-1908 between France, then conducting the foreign relations of Indo-China, and Siam. The application of the Treaty of 13 February 1904 was, in particular, involved. That Treaty established the general character of the frontier the exact boundary of which was to be delimited by a Franco-Siamese Mixed Commission
In the eastern sector of the Dangrek range, in which Preah Vihear was situated, the frontier was to follow the watershed line. For the purpose of delimiting that frontier, it was agreed, at a meeting held on 2 December 1906, that the Mixed Commission should travel along the Dangrek range carrying out all the necessary reconnaissance, and that a survey officer of the French section of the Commission should survey the whole of the eastern part of the range. It had not been contested that the Presidents of the French and Siamese sections duly made this journey, in the course of which they visited the Temple of Preah Vihear. In January-February 1907, the President of the French section had reported to his Government that the frontier-line had been definitely established. It therefore seemed clear that a frontier had been surveyed and fixed, although there was no record of any decision and no reference to the Dangrek region in any minutes of the meetings of the Commission after 2 December 1906. Moreover, at the time when the Commission might have met for the purpose of winding up its work, attention was directed towards the conclusion of a further Franco-Siamese boundary treaty, the Treaty of 23 March 1907.
The final stage of the delimitation was the preparation of maps. The Siamese Government, which did not dispose of adequate technical means, had requested that French officers should map the frontier region. These maps were completed in the autumn of 1907 by a team of French officers, some of whom had been members of the Mixed Commission, and they were communicated to the Siamese Government in 1908. Amongst them was a map of the Dangrek range showing Preah Vihear on the Cambodian side. It was on that map (filed as Annex I to its Memorial) that Cambodia had principally relied in support of her claim to sovereignty over the Temple. Thailand, on the other hand, had contended that the map, not being the work of the Mixed Commission, had no binding character; that the frontier indicated on it was not the true watershed line and that the true watershed line would place the Temple in Thailand, that the map had never been accepted by Thailand or, alternatively, that if Thailand had accepted it she had done so only because of a mistaken belief that the frontier indicated corresponded with the watershed line.
The Annex I map was never formally approved by the Mixed Commission, which had ceased to function some months before its production. While there could be no reasonable doubt that it was based on the work of the surveying officers in the Dangrek sector, the Court nevertheless concluded that, in its inception, it had no binding character. It was clear from the record, however, that the maps were communicated to the Siamese Government as purporting to represent the outcome of the work of delimitation; since there was no reaction on the part of the Siamese authorities, either then or for many years, they must be held to have acquiesced. The maps were moreover communicated to the Siamese members of the Mixed Commission, who said nothing. to the Siamese Minister of the Interior, Prince Damrong, who thanked the French Minister in Bangkok for them, and to the Siamese provincial governors, some of whom knew of Preah Vihear. If the Siamese authorities accepted the Annex I map without investigation, they could not now plead any error vitiating the reality of their consent.
The Siamese Government and later the Thai Government had raised no query about the Annex I map prior to its negotiations with Cambodia in Bangkok in 1958. But in 1934-1935 a survey had established a divergence between the map line and the true line of the watershed, and other maps had been produced showing the Temple as being in Thailand: Thailand had nevertheless continued also to use and indeed to publish maps showing Preah Vihear as lying in Cambodia. Moreover, in the course of the negotiations for the 1925 and 1937 Franco-Siamese Treaties, which confirmed the existing frontiers, and in 1947 in Washington before the Franco-Siamese Conciliation Commission, it would have been natural for Thailand to raise the matter: she did not do so. The natural inference was that she had accepted the frontier at Preah Vihear as it was drawn on the map, irrespective of its correspondence with the watershed line. Thailand had stated that having been, at all material times, in possession of Preah Vihear, she had had no need to raise the matter; she had indeed instanced the acts of her administrative authorities on the ground as evidence that she had never accepted the Annex I line at Preah Vihear. But the Court found it difficult to regard such local acts as negativing the consistent attitude of the central authorities. Moreover, when in 1930 Prince Damrong, on a visit to the Temple, was officially received there by the French Resident for the adjoining Cambodian province, Siam failed to react.
From these facts, the court concluded that Thailand had accepted the Annex I map. Even if there were any doubt in this connection, Thailand was not precluded from asserting that she had not accepted it since France and Cambodia had relied upon her acceptance and she had for fifty years enjoyed such benefits as the Treaty of 1904 has conferred on her. Furthermore, the acceptance of the Annex I map caused it to enter the treaty settlement; the Parties had at that time adopted an interpretation of that settlement which caused the map line to prevail over the provisions of the Treaty and, as there was no reason to think that the Parties had attached any special importance to the line of the watershed as such, as compared with the overriding importance of a final regulation of their own frontiers, the Court considered that the interpretation to be given now would be the same.
The Court therefore felt bound to pronounce in favour of the frontier indicated on the Annex I map in the disputed area and it became unnecessary to consider whether the line as mapped did in fact correspond to the true watershed line.
For these reasons, the Court upheld the submissions of Cambodia concerning sovereignty over Preah Vihear.
MH BIO ENERGY CO.LTD SOKYMEX COMPANY: PRODUCING ETHANOL FUEL AND EXPORTING TO EUROPE ACCORDING TO KOHSANTEPHEAP NEWS. WAS THAT POSSIBLE RESEARCHED AND PRODUCED BY CAMBODIAN TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENTIST TEAMS OR WAS IT BEING ASSISTED BY FOREIGNERS? IF IT’S DONE BY CAMBODIAN SCIENTISTS, IT IS A BREAKTHROUGH TECHNIQUE FOR CAMBODIA WITHOUT DEPENDING ON OUTSIDER’S HELPS IN RESEARCHING ITS OWN ENERGY SOURCES.
Well done madam. Keep up the good work.
Shut the fuck up meeh sompheugn (Mu Sochua). No one wants to hear anything from loser.
9:03 AM:
YOU shut up. If you've got nothing meaningful to say,...then shut your mouth. It's when people like you open their mouths that makes all Cambodian seem narrow-minded and mindless.
Mu Sochua is out there doing her best for her country. What have you've done?
9:03 AM,
If the person has no respect to the Khmer woman like you, I bet you would say something like that to your mother as well. Show some respect Ah Pluer. It doesn't matter who Mu Sochau is the fact she is a Khmer woman.
In order for SRP to get anywhere, Sam Rainsy and his wife need to step aside for others within the party. Otherwise it would be(Same old Shit)SOS, but different election.
They both are corrupted and selfish. They lavishly. Their son attends private school in Sigapor -for the elit families.
SRP Party becomes their private business compay.
10.57 am, at least Sam Rainsy use his own money for sending his children to private school unlike some leaders using the country accounts as their own.
The bitch must stop dragging Khmer people down to hell with her stupid clan.
Ms. Sochua should be everything opposit to Ms. Ing Kantha Phavi. Take reahu.net as her stand and defending Khmer's art to its fullest. Get the education department going about an open society and Khmer's art. There is no need to hide behind those baggy clothing forever. Cambodian can draw and express their feeling. It's their business of making a living. Everyone must able to live their life with liberty and to be able to pursue their happiness according to their choise. If they are going over board and dangerous to the society,example: like using kids under 18 to do their dirty job then there are policemen and jail. Ms. Sochua should be able to mobilize and get involved in those institutions as much as Ms. Kantha does. The CPP people shouldn't be the only one that could have power and right in it. Go right ahead my lady, you're looking great!
Look at the picture! people looked so dirty and poor under SRP leader ship?
Look at Hun sen family they look richer than Thai King! Viva CPP you make Hun Sen 's family rich!
10:41 PM.. you are so dumped !
Countryside peoples can not be compared to Phnom Penh
resident. These cambodians are mostly poor.
And you draw a terrible wrong conclusion.
Most peasants support wrongly CPPs.
More of the peoples whom you said look Dirty are
too CPP's members. They are so many being force
to vote for CPP..
If they don't vote for CPP, they go to visit Pol Pot..
Freedom people work to help these look dirty peasants...
Khmer Canadian
10:41 PM:
You are really dumb. Hun Sen's family is only rich because that money illegally is leeched from the international donations that serves as a major source of Cambodia's national budget.
Hun Sen's family aren't that smart to make their own money. They only know how to steal, intimidate, bribe, lie, and kill. The Hun Sen clan is basically one big mafia in functionality.
Post a Comment