Theary Seng's Clarification on the France 24 Phone Interview

Friday, July 30, 2010
By Theary C. Seng

Regarding the telephone interview I gave yesterday (July 28) with France 24, I would like to make the following clarifications:

1. I am the founder of the Center for Justice & Reconciliation and founding president of CIVICUS: Center for Cambodian Civic Education, no longer of the Center for Social Development since the politically-motivated injunction order removing me in July 2009.

2. There is real fear that Duch, not a "senior" Khmer Rouge leader, will be made the sole scapegoat of the murderous, genocidal KR regime; we know this current Cambodian government never wanted this Tribunal and certainly not the Case 002 involving the senior KR leaders to move forward.

3. The ECCC is the lowest common denominator of a political compromise.

We need to bear in mind, despite our faith in the UN to assist in raising the standard of international justice, both parties (Cambodian Government and UN) have an agenda; the Cambodian government to whitewash its Khmer Rouge connection and the UN to hail anything a quick victory (even if dismal) and depart quickly before the ramifications set in (think UNTAC). At the end of the day, we the Cambodian people must take ownership of the process or else we will be disappointed in our naive reliance.

Hence I have two theories viewed through the lens of political interference:

(i) The dramatic, public sacking of Duch UN lawyer Francois Roux at the eleventh hour is to irreversibly discredit Duch as a star witness in Case 002 involving the senior KR leaders, the heart of the Tribunal. Duch has been consistent in implicating the senior KR leaders. What is the best way to discredit a star witness but by attacking his credibility. Before Duch's changing of position and sacking of his lawyer, it was an open question whether Duch has rehabilitated and genuine in his remorse and confession; the switch and the sacking erased any credibility for many regarding Duch's reformed character and will cast an even darker shadow on anything he will have to say in Case 002.

(ii) Because this Tribunal has been so contextualized by political interests and regularly punctured with overt invidious political interference, it is difficult for me not to be a bit cynical to think that the incomprehensibly lenient sentence has the hand of politics behind it to create this cynicism that is unfortunately surfacing.

BUT, BUT... we need to think of the larger picture which is the demand of Case 002. Without the start and completion of Case 002, this Tribunal will be considered a failure - a waste of everyone's time, energy, resources in the millions and worst the embedding of irreversible cynicism in a society already so fractured by distrust and fear. We CANNOT, CANNOT let this happen. We have to move on from our anger and disappointment and channel that energy toward advocating, demanding for the quick start of Case 002, the heart of this Tribunal.

- Theary Seng, Phnom Penh, 29 July 2010. www.thearyseng.com