Hun Xen's gift is useless in Cambodia ... due to EXTREME POVERTY under his regime

Begging triplet in Koh Kong (Photo: DAP-news)

Mum awarded ‘triplets gift’, still can’t get home

Monday, 03 September 2012
Sen David
The Phnom Penh Post

A mother of 10 who begs in a Koh Kong provincial market for money to care for her kids had already received money from the government after giving birth to triplets, an ad­­vis­­er to Hun Sen said yester­day.

Yos Ngol, 39, from Bavet town, was featured in local media over the weekend begging with her baby triplets. It was reported she had not received a much-trumpeted triplets “gift” from the prime minister, which adviser Seng Tieng denied.

“When they were born, the local authority in­­formed us . . . we have com­ple­­­t­­­ed our obligations,” he said, adding that 234 families with triplets had each re­­ceived 3 million riel (US$740) and 20 kilo­­grams of rice from Hun Sen since 1999. Ngol said yes­terday her family could not afford to return home.

Hun Sen government must resign because of its inability to resolve border crisis and its disrespect for the Constitution

22 June 2011

HUN SEN GOVERNMENT MUST RESIGN BECAUSE OF ITS INABILITY TO RESOLVE BORDER CRISIS AND ITS DISRESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION

The Hun Sen government must resign because of its inability to effectively defend Cambodia’s territorial integrity in the face of a dangerous aggression by Thailand in the areas surrounding Preah Vihear temple and other smaller temples in the north and northwest of the country.

The only effective way to defend Cambodia against any foreign aggression is through peaceful means, notably by calling for the implementation of the 1991 Paris Agreements on Cambodia.

On several occasions, Members of Parliament from the opposition Sam Rainsy Party have proposed to the Government to call on all the signatories of the Paris Agreements to respect their obligations as stated in the Agreements, but to no avail.

Most recently, on 6 June 2011, a group of opposition MPs officially wrote to Prime Minister Hun Sen asking him to elaborate on the reasons why he had refused to consider this most legitimate and most reasonable proposal (see below our 8 May 2011 statement “Hun Sen to explain why his government has yet to call for the implementation of the Paris Agreements”).

But as of today, the government has not bothered to reply to our request for explanation, a request which we made in our capacity as elected representatives of the people. This constitutes a serious violation of the Constitution, whose Article 96 stipulates that the government must respond to any letter from any Member of Parliament within seven days.

The Hun Sen government has shown its inability to resolve the dangerous border crisis with Thailand, to defend Cambodia’s territorial integrity and to avoid bloodshed. It has shown its incompetence in handling international relations and in ensuring the implementation of relevant international treaties. The Hun Sen government must all the more resign from office after showing its disrespect for the country’s supreme law regarding relations between Government and Parliament.

SRP Members of Parliament

------------------------

8 May 2011

HUN SEN TO EXPLAIN WHY HIS GOVERNMENT HAS YET TO CALL FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PARIS AGREEMENTS TO HELP DEFEND CAMBODIA

On 6 May 2011 a group of opposition members of parliament officially wrote to prime minister Hun Sen the following letter (translation from Khmer):

To: Prime Minister Hun Sen.

By kindness of: National Assembly President Heng Samrin.

Subject: Implementation of the 1991 Paris Agreements on Cambodia.

Considering:

• Article 96 of the Constitution (which compels the Government to respond to any question from any Member of Parliament within seven days).
• The 1991 Paris Peace Agreements on Cambodia.
• Opposition leader Sam Rainsy’s 11 February 2011 letter to Prime Minister Hun Sen (about legal and peaceful means to defend Cambodia against a foreign aggression).

We, the undersigned Members of Parliament, would like to ask you why the Government has not yet called on the international community, especially the signatories of the 1991 Paris Agreements on Cambodia, to effectively and immediately implement these Agreements at a time when Cambodia is facing an obvious aggression from Thailand.

We would like to remind you that the Paris Peace Agreements not only recognize the right of Cambodia to call for help from the international community when our country feels threatened -- let alone aggressed -- by any other country, but they also spell out the obligation of all the signatories to respond to such a call. Moreover, they specify the mechanisms whereby the international community has to effectively, actively and quickly respond to Cambodia’s call.

Article 5 of the “Agreement Concerning the Sovereignty, Independence, Territorial Integrity and Inviolability, Neutrality and National Unity of Cambodia” says:

1. In the event of a violation or threat of violation of the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and inviolability, neutrality or national unity of Cambodia (…) the parties to this agreement undertake to consult immediately with a view to adopting all appropriate steps to ensure respect for these commitments and resolving any such violations through peaceful means.
2.  Such steps may include, inter alia, reference of the matter to the Security Council of the United Nations or recourse to the means for the peaceful settlement of disputes referred to in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations.
3.  The parties to this Agreement may also call upon the assistance of the co-Chairmen of the Paris Conference on Cambodia [France and Indonesia].

We would like to also remind you that in 1991, eighteen friendly countries signed the Paris Agreements on Cambodia. Among them there were all the world powers (USA, China, Soviet Union/Russia, UK, France, etc.) and all Cambodia’s neighboring countries including Thailand.

In short, the Paris Agreements represent the most important and the most effective legal instrument for the defense of Cambodia’s territorial

integrity and for justice to be rendered to the Cambodian people as H.E. Sam Rainsy has already explained to you.

Therefore we ask you to tell us the reasons why your government has yet to call on the signatories of the Paris Agreements to respect their commitments to help Cambodia in the critical situation our country is facing now.

Please kindly and appropriately answer our question.

Sincerely,

[Names and signatures of MPs from the Sam Rainsy Party: Kuoy Bunroeun, Tioulong Saumura, Nuth Rumduol, Men Sothavarin, Chea Poch, Ho Vann, Kong Bora, Khy Vandeth].

The Khmer Rouge Tribunal's Rebirth

June 9, 2008
By JOHN A. HALL
FROM TODAY'S WALL STREET JOURNAL ASIA

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia

Eight months ago the United Nations-sponsored Khmer Rouge tribunal in Phnom Penh didn't look like it was worth funding. The United Nations Development Program, which distributes donor funds to the Cambodian side of the tribunal, had tried and failed to suppress an embarrassing audit, first revealed on these pages. The Open Society Justice Initiative's Phnom Penh office brought to light various irregularities at the tribunal, including damning allegations that Cambodian tribunal staff and judges were required to kickback part of their salaries to keep their jobs.

Now the cash is running out. This week, the tribunal is expected to ask donor nations for around $100 million to fund its activities for the next three years. Given the advanced age and poor health of the surviving leaders of the Khmer Rouge, the stakes are high. But the tribunal's progress over the past few months has been marked. It is now is worth funding.

Last year's audit noted grievous mismanagement, fiscal irregularities and grossly deficient staffing at the tribunal. In response to those complaints, hiring procedures have been improved and made more transparent. International managers now participate in evaluating Khmer staff; Cambodian appointees must meet the advertised minimum qualifications required for their positions, and the unqualified have been eased out. True, some reforms are more dubious, like the requirement that Cambodian staff sign a pledge stating their opposition to corruption at the tribunal. And the comical suggestion box set up for whistleblowers to report dereliction of duty remains unused. But the trend is generally in the right direction.

New senior managers show promise. Take Knut Rosandhaug, who last week took over as coordinator of U.N. assistance to the Khmer Rouge trials and deputy director of the tribunal administration. The pragmatic Norwegian lawyer boasts 20 years of experience in policy making, negotiation, program management, human rights and conflict negotiation. As a director at the U.N. mission in Kosovo, he won a reputation for knocking heads and getting results. He promises the same in Phnom Penh, where five senior Khmer Rouge leaders are – some 30 years after their alleged crimes – finally in the dock.

The tribunal's newly appointed "Special Expert," ex-Yugoslavia tribunal prosecutor David Tolbert, has also won plaudits – especially when it comes to the tribunal's much-maligned budget process. Having exhausted its woefully inadequate initial budget of $56 million, the tribunal submitted a new budget in January asking for an additional $114 million. Donor nations, reluctant to keep funding such a corrupted enterprise, tied their pledges to clear proof that their checks would not be squandered or stolen.

Mr. Tolbert has carved out better lines of communication between donors and the tribunal, after years of distrust and suspicion between them. He has also encouraged tribunal staff to adopt plans for increased fiscal and managerial transparency in order to keep cash pipelines flowing. The new budget, revised since January, will be formally proposed this week.

There remain good reasons to be skeptical of both the Cambodian government and the U.N. No investigation has ever been undertaken, for example, to address the kickback allegations. The Cambodians have insisted auditors found no such evidence. In fact the auditors did not investigate that issue, as it fell outside their mandate. Privately, international observers acknowledge that the Cambodian government will simply refuse to undertake such an investigation. One solution may be to ignore past allegations of corruption, while making clear that any future wrongdoing will not be tolerated. That's not a perfect solution, but it would allow the tribunal to move ahead and perform its work.

The greatest fear, of course, is "slippage"; the idea that the Cambodian side of the tribunal is on its best behavior because the donors are so focused on the issues of corruption and mismanagement, and will return to business as usual as soon as the magnifying glass is removed. The trick, then, will be to ensure that the good behavior is not fleeting, requiring airtight checks and balances to fend off the bad habits of old.

Despite these doubts, there is a growing sense in Phnom Penh that an important corner has been turned and that we may be witnessing the rebirth of a tribunal that deserves support.

Mr. Hall is an associate professor of law and director of the Center for Global Trade and Development at Chapman University School of Law in Orange, California.