On Behalf of the Dead

KR leaders charged by the ECCC (Photo: Reuters)

Then-Prince Norodom Sihanouk and then-Princess Monique taking pictures with KR leaders in Cambodia on 10 April 1973

May 19, 2009
Op-Ed by Justin C. Sok

No one was eager to enter a debate and/or proceed with a lawsuit for war crimes and crimes against humanity with the living on behalf of the dead, not when the living still had power and were more than willing to use it. However, after incessant negotiations and diplomatic talks with the Royal Government of Cambodia, the United Nations, although they found deficiencies, had acquiesced to follow the Royal Government of Cambodia’s penal law, they reached an agreement.

For the general public, especially, Khmer people, we need to understand the purpose of the agreement of the Law on Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.

Article I

“The purpose of the present Agreement is to regulate the cooperation between the United Nation and the Royal Government of Cambodia in bringing to trial senior leaders of Democratic Kampuchea and those who were most responsible for the crimes and serious violations of Cambodia penal law, international humanitarian law and custom, and international conventions recognized by Cambodia, that were committed during the period from 17 April 1975 to 6 January 1979. The Agreement provides, inter alia, the legal basis and the principles and modalities for such cooperation.”

Article I implies that there will neither be legal proceedings as to what had happened from the period before 17 April 1975, nor will there be any legal investigations about what had happened after the 6 January 1979. The ECCC, which recently began, issued judicial inquiries into the facts, as to whom among these “Suspects”: Noun Chea, Khieu Samphan, Ieng Thirith, Ieng Sary, and Duch (Kaing Guek Eav), was the “Angkar” or the “Higher Organizations”, and had made the “order” or was being “ordered” to kill innocent Khmer people. Irrefutably, this is clearly about “Khmer Rouge Killing Khmer.”

As set forth by the Law on ECCC, Chapter XI - Penalties

Article 38

“All penalties shall be limited to imprisonment.”

Article 39

“Those who have committed any crimes as provided in Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, shall be sentenced to a prison term from five years to life imprisonment.”

In general consent, if these “Suspects” were to be convicted, the punishment of either “life imprisonment” or even death, would not be sufficient for the crimes they had committed. However, what the general public understands is that these “Suspects” are so instrumental to the Khmer nation. It is true that history is history. We can’t change the past. We should acknowledge and accept our past and teach our Khmer people and the generations to come about our country’s recent violent past. We can broaden of our thinking by learning from our past mistakes and draw our own logical conclusions, and hope that we would not choose that same path again. But what is so important about this tribunal is that, we would like these “Suspects” to tell us, and the world, as to whom, and perhaps, which countries had politically orchestrated the events that led 1.7 millions of our innocent Khmer people to the mass graves. The information these “Suspects” provide may be irrelevant or inadmissible to the current trial, but as a matter of records, it is very crucial information for Cambodia and for her generations to come. Mr. Khieu Samphan, the “water is now clear,” and under strict advisement of your defense counsels, you ought to consider for this opportunity to set the record straight, start talking!

In the Law on ECCC, Chapter VIII – Individual Responsibility

Article 29

“Any Suspect who planned, instigated, ordered, aided and abetted, or committed the crimes referred to in article 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of this law shall be individually responsible for the crime.”

“The position or rank of any Suspect shall not relieve such person of criminal responsibility or mitigate punishment.”

“The fact that any of the acts referred to in Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the this law were committed by a subordinate does not relieve the superior of personal criminal responsibility if the superior had effective command and control or authority and control over the subordinate, and the superior knew or had reason to know that the subordinate was about to commit such acts or had done so and the superior failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such acts or to punish the perpetrators.”

“The fact that a Suspect acted pursuant to an order of the Government of Democratic Kampuchea or of a superior shall not relieve the Suspect of individual criminal responsibility.”

As a leader, His Majesty is held in the highest regard. The Khmer people had entrusted His Majesty to undertake His duties as expected of His Majesty and to adhere to ethical and moral principles, which include honesty and integrity as a leader to lead the nation. There is substantial evidence including documents and literature, which have overwhelmingly proven that His Majesty was either directly or indirectly “cooperating” (Sahakar) with the Communist Party of Democratic Kampuchea during the period between 17 of April 1975 and 6 of January 1979.

In the Law on ECCC, Chapter XII – Amnesty and Pardons

Article 40

The Royal Government of Cambodia shall not request an amnesty or pardon for any person who may be investigated for or convicted of crimes referred to in Articles 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of this law. The scope of any amnesty or pardon that may have been granted prior to the enactment of this Law is a matter to be decided by the Extraordinary Chambers.

In the report on May 4, 2009, Sok Khemara, (VOA Khmer/KI-Media), one of the defense counsels stated, “Norodom Sihanouk could provide important historical information about the regime, having entered a coalition with the guerrillas until March 1976.”

Andrew Ianuzzi, another defense counsel has also stated, “We never asked them to be investigated. We simply asked for them to be called as witnesses, because we understand those individuals, mainly Hun Sen, Chea Sim, Heng Samrin and former King Sihanouk, were in Cambodia during the period of the Khmer Rouge regime. Testimony of Norodom Sihanouk could be especially important, because the former King had frequent interaction with top leaders of the regime.”

The public has sympathized with His Majesty regarding the loss of His family members and the political implications that His Majesty had to wade through. However, whatever the reasons were, it is still a matter of national interest, which every Khmer person has a right and reason to examine the facts of His Majesty’s involvement. The public strongly believes that His Majesty was and is still the center of an intricate political web, in which His Majesty is the One who is able to pull a small thread that would unravel the mystery and disclose the naked truth about the “Killing Fields”. Therefore, in the court of public opinion, the Khmer people would want His Majesty, to appeal to them, publicly, and perhaps, to offer an explanation to shed light as to what had caused the smoldering ashes of million of innocent Khmer people and the remains of the thousands of bones at the Tuol Sleng Museum.

His Majesty can assemble an army of lawyers to represent You. His Majesty can use the nation’s constitution for Your defensive bulwark by asserting special privilege and immunity. His Majesty can look for divine intervention for moral, mental, and spiritual support and guidance. But the Khmer People would refuse to continue to live under a cloud of injustice. Their will, will always seek justice. Their healing would first begin with the truth and punishment for those responsible for their sufferings.

“Socrates’ argument that philosophers should become kings or philosophers: Only the wisest human beings should exercise political power.” If Socrates’ argument was true, the Khmer people have been very unfortunate.

http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2009/05/survivors-stories-by-justin-sok.html

Justin C. Sok
May 19, 2009