Kaing Guek Eav, left, sat in the courtroom at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, during the closing statements in Phnom Penh on Friday. (Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, via European Pressphoto Agency)
November 29, 2009
By SETH MYDANS
The New York Times
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — The first trial to showcase the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge three decades ago concluded with the regime’s chief torturer still seemingly unable to grasp the magnitude of his actions. Yet despite that surprising end, the trial may have helped Cambodia begin to move beyond the horrors of its past.
The defendant, Kaing Guek Eav, 67, known as Duch, was the first leading Khmer Rouge figure to be tried in connection with the deaths of 1.7 million people when the brutal Communist regime ruled Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. Throughout the trial, he described in detail his role as the commandant of Tuol Sleng prison, also known as S-21, where at least 14,000 people were tortured and sent to their deaths.
After admitting his guilt and asking for forgiveness, Duch (pronounced DOIK) seemed on the final day of the trial on Friday to think that he had done enough, asking the court to set him free.
Duch’s plea seemed to contradict a carefully constructed strategy to seek leniency by admitting guilt, apologizing and cooperating with the court. He faces a possible term of life in prison for crimes against humanity and other crimes. Prosecutors are seeking a sentence of 40 years, taking into account his cooperation and the five years he already spent in a military jail. The judges are expected to announce a verdict early next year.
Despite long delays and concerns about corruption and possible political interference, “Case One” of the United Nations-backed tribunal mostly overcame doubts that it would meet international standards of justice.
The case broke new ground as a hybrid of national and international justice systems with the support of the United Nations. In another innovation, it included the participation of some victims as “civil parties” represented in court by their own lawyers.
After a slow start, the trial began to draw the attention of a nation that for the past three decades has mostly hidden from the traumas of the Khmer Rouge years. Coinciding with the trial, a new textbook about the Khmer regime began distribution to the high schools, breaking a silence in the education system that has contributed to widespread ignorance.
Human rights groups and legal experts said they hoped the trial would act as an example to help reform Cambodia’s corrupt justice system and erode a culture of impunity, in which powerful people often act beyond the reach of the law.
“The Duch trial itself proceeded methodically and, in the end, was a success,” said Alex Hinton, director of the Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights at Rutgers University. “Duch received the fair trial his victims never had.”
A more difficult challenge lies ahead in “Case Two” with the trials of four senior Khmer Rouge leaders who are accused of more far reaching responsibility in the mass killings but against whom the evidence is less concrete.
Unlike Duch, they have denied their guilt and refused to cooperate; their lawyers have already begun complicating the process with legal challenges. Their trial is not expected to get under way until 2012.
Beyond the legal and historical issues examined in the trial, the past nine months have been an exploration of more fundamental questions of human behavior — of guilt and responsibility, and the legal and moral weight of an apology.
“I am accountable to the entire Cambodian population for the souls that perished,” Duch said in a final statement to the court. “I am deeply remorseful and regret such a mind-boggling scale of death.”
But as with a similar statement at the start of the trial, he read on Friday from a prepared text with little sign of emotion, and both the prosecutors and many analysts derided his apology as insincere and tactical.
Nevertheless, “He has apologized and asked to be forgiven, and he has willingly assisted in many aspects of the case,” said Nic Dunlop, the author of a book about Duch called “The Lonely Executioner.”
“We can talk about his lack of empathy. We can talk about his detachment. But these are things he has done that nobody else has done,” Mr. Dunlop said.
For Cambodians who attended the final week of the trial, though, these apologies seemed far too little and the legal fine points of the prosecutors’ request for a reduced sentence seemed irrelevant.
“I can’t accept his apology,” said Peon Tol, 26, a villager who said her grandparents and aunt had been killed by the Khmer Rouge. “It’s not like he was stealing chickens. These crimes are too much to forgive.”
Seung Sophal, 41, a farmer who had traveled here by bus from the countryside, said, “Duch admitted killing people at Tuol Sleng, thousands of people. He committed the crimes and now he is apologizing. It is a little too late to do that.”
Duch’s apologies seemed at odds with the obvious pride he took in his administration of the prison, which the historian David Chandler called “the only institution that functioned” under the Khmer Rouge regime.
“He was an enthusiastic and proud administrator of S-21 who worked out techniques and organizational methodology from scratch,” said Mr. Chandler, who testified at the trial as an expert witness.
Like other analysts, he said Duch seemed to have been motivated by a desire to please his superiors.
“This is not the banality of evil,” Mr. Chandler said. “This guy, he’s a full-time performer. What he is concerned about is the accuracy of his story.”
The defendant, Kaing Guek Eav, 67, known as Duch, was the first leading Khmer Rouge figure to be tried in connection with the deaths of 1.7 million people when the brutal Communist regime ruled Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. Throughout the trial, he described in detail his role as the commandant of Tuol Sleng prison, also known as S-21, where at least 14,000 people were tortured and sent to their deaths.
After admitting his guilt and asking for forgiveness, Duch (pronounced DOIK) seemed on the final day of the trial on Friday to think that he had done enough, asking the court to set him free.
Duch’s plea seemed to contradict a carefully constructed strategy to seek leniency by admitting guilt, apologizing and cooperating with the court. He faces a possible term of life in prison for crimes against humanity and other crimes. Prosecutors are seeking a sentence of 40 years, taking into account his cooperation and the five years he already spent in a military jail. The judges are expected to announce a verdict early next year.
Despite long delays and concerns about corruption and possible political interference, “Case One” of the United Nations-backed tribunal mostly overcame doubts that it would meet international standards of justice.
The case broke new ground as a hybrid of national and international justice systems with the support of the United Nations. In another innovation, it included the participation of some victims as “civil parties” represented in court by their own lawyers.
After a slow start, the trial began to draw the attention of a nation that for the past three decades has mostly hidden from the traumas of the Khmer Rouge years. Coinciding with the trial, a new textbook about the Khmer regime began distribution to the high schools, breaking a silence in the education system that has contributed to widespread ignorance.
Human rights groups and legal experts said they hoped the trial would act as an example to help reform Cambodia’s corrupt justice system and erode a culture of impunity, in which powerful people often act beyond the reach of the law.
“The Duch trial itself proceeded methodically and, in the end, was a success,” said Alex Hinton, director of the Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights at Rutgers University. “Duch received the fair trial his victims never had.”
A more difficult challenge lies ahead in “Case Two” with the trials of four senior Khmer Rouge leaders who are accused of more far reaching responsibility in the mass killings but against whom the evidence is less concrete.
Unlike Duch, they have denied their guilt and refused to cooperate; their lawyers have already begun complicating the process with legal challenges. Their trial is not expected to get under way until 2012.
Beyond the legal and historical issues examined in the trial, the past nine months have been an exploration of more fundamental questions of human behavior — of guilt and responsibility, and the legal and moral weight of an apology.
“I am accountable to the entire Cambodian population for the souls that perished,” Duch said in a final statement to the court. “I am deeply remorseful and regret such a mind-boggling scale of death.”
But as with a similar statement at the start of the trial, he read on Friday from a prepared text with little sign of emotion, and both the prosecutors and many analysts derided his apology as insincere and tactical.
Nevertheless, “He has apologized and asked to be forgiven, and he has willingly assisted in many aspects of the case,” said Nic Dunlop, the author of a book about Duch called “The Lonely Executioner.”
“We can talk about his lack of empathy. We can talk about his detachment. But these are things he has done that nobody else has done,” Mr. Dunlop said.
For Cambodians who attended the final week of the trial, though, these apologies seemed far too little and the legal fine points of the prosecutors’ request for a reduced sentence seemed irrelevant.
“I can’t accept his apology,” said Peon Tol, 26, a villager who said her grandparents and aunt had been killed by the Khmer Rouge. “It’s not like he was stealing chickens. These crimes are too much to forgive.”
Seung Sophal, 41, a farmer who had traveled here by bus from the countryside, said, “Duch admitted killing people at Tuol Sleng, thousands of people. He committed the crimes and now he is apologizing. It is a little too late to do that.”
Duch’s apologies seemed at odds with the obvious pride he took in his administration of the prison, which the historian David Chandler called “the only institution that functioned” under the Khmer Rouge regime.
“He was an enthusiastic and proud administrator of S-21 who worked out techniques and organizational methodology from scratch,” said Mr. Chandler, who testified at the trial as an expert witness.
Like other analysts, he said Duch seemed to have been motivated by a desire to please his superiors.
“This is not the banality of evil,” Mr. Chandler said. “This guy, he’s a full-time performer. What he is concerned about is the accuracy of his story.”
2 comments:
I am not a KR and was not a former KR. I am not either pro the killing conducted by the terror regime.
I was born just after the KR regime fortunately.
Related to the recent decision of the ECCC on Duch's case, here i [in the name of an ordinary people] want to raise my ideas as following:
1. It is just that prosecutors demanded Duch a 40-year jail term? As his lawyer (Francois) mentioned that Duch had to "kill or be killed" and operate like an "obedient machine". That's logic! Can you all imagine how was that situation? If you were him, what would you do?_I would say i would act like him and you too!
Polt Pot also said "the ones who stuck with hands, hands will be lost, stuck with foot, foot will be lost, at the moment that the history cycle is running"
2. It is just to put him 40 years in prison? As he was only a prison's chief during the regime, when there were other hundreds of prisons where managed by many other KR who some are survided and live freely. Why they are not put to trial??? It exactly sounds that Duch had very small position, who executed his duties following orders from his leaders of revolution. I think everyone can understand about that.
3.According to the ECCC provisions/regulations [like the other international crimes], only the top official shall be prosecuted and how can just a prisoner head be the top official.Top officials would refer to the prime minister, president of the national assembly, cabinet head, and other national policy decision-makers.
4.According to a political integration of the government to forgively appeal for all the KR to join and work for the government, that the government would not condemn or without any imprisonment.
Due to my four above reasons, i would like to appeal to the ECCC court two points:
1.To jail him 40 years in prison, but it must be on parole [release him temporarily or permanently to stay at home with his family until the completion of his sentence, on recognition his remorse in the interests of national reconciliation. And anyway he is too old to stay alone in the prison.
Moreover in term of human resource, he is very qualified for the social interest. He will can do a lot of things for the nation both education and history! Why the court has to keep him in the prison?
2.To jail him only 3 years, 8 months and 20 days [the whole period when he was in power]. Remember that without Duch, the trial could not have unfolded if he, like others, had decided to remain in silence! He is not a major example of the killing who has to be seriously jailed as a compensation for that killing.
Yos Katank
I had lived through the Khmer Rouge period and had gone to Labor Camp and more. In addition, I also had solid amount of education and over 19 years working in the US judicial system. Crime in such magtitudes serving less than 4 years? You received 5 years of Jail time for threatening to kill a person in America. Duch deserved many life times in jail since there is no capital punishment in Cambodia.
Post a Comment