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].

On the constitutional role of the king - Editorial by Ven. Hok Savann

Click on the article in Khmer to zoom in

SRP MP Son Chhay on the Draft Law on Tourism

On 28 April 2009, SRP MP Son Chhay addressed the National Assembly Floor on the Draft Law on Tourism.

2nd Episode: A Tale of "A Strongman in A Weak State"

Original post: http://cambodianbrightfuture.blogspot.com/

Good to have chance read your idea (2:05AM). I am lucky to engage in debating with you about this issue. Of course this idea is not yours alone, many Cambodians think like this too.

I concur that this idea exist because having many factors:

1. Cambodian people are still afraid of war because each day Hun Sen and his teamwork talk about Khmer Rouge brutality and social turmoil. In your idea, this propaganda produces positive change slowly in Cambodia like what you think or not? I tell you, it is just the tactic of power men who cling to power until they die. Ok, many Cambodians say that they are not immortal, one day those evil leaders will dies. Yes this is true, but they have to know the bad legacy as well as their clans and their families are not going to die? NEVER DIE!
2. Cambodian people are having one syndrome called "PTSD" that they don't want to see change, they experience enough suffering (now they are living in the well of suffering). You may be like that too. But you can think again that "when you are living in the well of suffering, and maintain that status quo or let it change slowly, is your suffering will be better or worse?)
3. Cambodian people are brainwashed too much by their own leaders since King Sihanouk, Lon Nol, Pol Pot, and finally Hun Sen. Those leaders have never encouraged Cambodian people to development their own capacity, productive personality to have self-determination, self-confidence and self-progress at all.

You have to think twice about this. Human beings in the world have the same desire: hate suffering and love happiness. It is regardless of where they are living: Asia, Europe, Africa or else where. This is simple to understand, no need to finish college or university like you suggested.

Regarding National Congress is important in the chapter of Constitution. This chapter should not be omitted or neglected if Cambodia wants to develop its democracy. But Hun Sen comes up with that proposal because it is certainly reflecting Cambodia as a "Weak State with a Strongman". This proposal shows that Hun Sen is a strongman only to make war, instability, dictatorship and bullying his own people. He is not a strongman to develop democracy, to protect his nation from poverty, to protect foreign invasion or other national catastrophes.

Is he strong or is he weak? Though this small chapter invaluable in the Constitution, he dare not to make a deal and face with it. He should push this chapter into practice in order to build his fame as a democratic leader as well as to play his political model role for future Cambodians. He should not be so cowardice. He is strong to fire anyone from position, he is strong to force or break all public demonstrations, he is strong to defeat all his opponents...but why he is not strong to implement this important chapter in the Constitution.

It will not cause any turmoil like he jeopardized. It depends on good or bad logistics. National Congress is very important to listen the voice of the bottom Cambodians as well as to give them chance to learn on how to develop "self-determination", "self-progress", and "self-reliance". Cambodian leaders should stop the culture of fooling Cambodian people in order to enjoy selfishness, short term benefit or fake benefit for themselves and their clans.

This episode of "A Tale of a Strongman in a Weak State" reflects the continual political culture of Cambodia that has always weakened and fooled the Cambodian people in order to benefit their arrogant power ambition. This culture shows only in a "Weak State" with an "less educated strong leaders".

In brief, last time I mirrored Cambodia as a "weak state" because this country is still not able to protect the weak, the poor, the farmers and the indigenous people. Cambodian political leaders, the middle classes and the elites are still earning their living at the expenses of the poor, the weak, the farmers and the indigenous people.

You are welcome to read and enjoy next 3rd episode in the same tittle "Weak State with a Strongman".

KY

The monarchy cannot be abolished through the constitution: Dr. Chhim Phal Vorun

Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata

Dr. Chhim Phal Vorun, director of the institute for Civil Education and a Constitutional expert, gave an interview to The Mekong times regarding whether the monarchy can be abolished once again or not. He explained that “this issue must be divided into 2 parts. If we want to change the monarchy (i.e. replacing the monarchy by a republic), then we cannot do much because the constitution ties us to the monarchy. However, outside of the constitution, a revolution can be undertaken. There are two types of revolution: one that use the group power, and one that use the people power, i.e. the toppling revolution and the democratic revolution.” Dr. Chhim Phal Vorun added: “Like in Nepal, it was a democratic revolution, (the abolition of the monarchy) was not conducted within the constitution framework, but it was done by the population vote. Therefore, in Cambodia, (the abolition of the monarchy) cannot be undertaken within the framework of the constitution because the law ties us. Therefore, in the future, the abolition of the monarchy through the constitution cannot be performed. In order to preserve the durability of the monarchy, everybody must consider that the monarchy belongs to all of us. However, if Cambodia has only 2 to 3 parties which all claim that the monarchy is theirs alone, this situation in fact creates instability for the monarchy in Cambodia instead.”

Son Soubert: Cambodia has 1 reigning King, 1 retired King with the status of a King, 1 Queen of the retired King ... and 1 confusing constitution

Click on the letter to zoom in

SON SANN FOUNDATION / FONDATION SON SANN

DECLARATION OF THE SON SANN FOUNDATION ON THE SO-CALLED QUESTION OF IMMUNITY.

Recently because of an obscure and anonymous organization which did not have the courage to state their points of view openly and seems to work for foreign interests to the detriment of the National interests of Cambodia, raised confusingly the question of the "so-called" immunity of the King Father. It is a pity that serious organizations like the UN or the Hong-Kong based ASEAN Human Rights organization fell into this comedy without sound consideration and discernment.

In the Chapter 2 of the 1993 Cambodian Constitution on the Monarchy, there is no mention of immunity as it is conceived for the People's Representatives or the Members of the National Assembly as stipulated in the Chapter 7, Article 8 of the same Supreme Law. As a Head of State, either the King or the President of the Republic is an inviolable (Chapter 2, Article 7), since He or She is the personification of the State or Nation that is untouchable. Any critic or insult to this Function and by extension to His/Her Person is a matter of Lese-Majesty in the case of the King. Another privilege of the King is that His Message to the Senate or to the National Assembly cannot be debated (Article 18 New). There is no mention of immunity that can be lifted. The status of inviolability of the King is also extended to the King Father and the Queen Mother, since the National Assembly of the Kingdom of Cambodia unanimously adopted a law bestowing on Them the titles of Father and Mother of the Nation. Although He is retired, the King Father still retains the status of a King whose Person is inviolable, that is why in the public offices and places, we can see the Portrait of the King Father and/or of the Queen Mother hung with that of the reigning King...

The Parliamentarian immunity is well defined in the Constitution, in the Rule of Procedure of the National Assembly and in the interpretation of the Constitutional Council, to elaborate once again on this, except the notion that this immunity is confined to the mandate of the members of the National Assembly in the exercise of their function and could be lifted in case of flagrant criminal offenses. This is completely opposite to the concept of inviolability of the Person of the King.

Phnom Penh, 07 September 2007
(Singed) SON Soubert
President of the Permanent Committee