The Draft Law On Peaceful Demonstrations Is Seriously Flawed: CCHR

CAMBODIAN CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

PRESS RELEASE
Phnom Penh, 19 June 2009

THE DRAFT LAW ON PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATIONS IS SERIOUSLY FLAWED

The CCHR is concerned that certain provisions within the current proposed law on demonstrations will seriously impinge upon Cambodia’s national and international human rights obligations.

The reality is that peaceful assemblies, currently and historically, have lead disruption of public order. The unfortunate reality is that some form of regulation is required. Nevertheless, the fragile balance between upholding peoples’ right to freedom of speech and association, and protection of the public from mass violence, is one which must be vehemently and carefully maintained. In times of peace, this balance must fall in favour of the freedoms enshrined in a democracy.

Furthermore, due attention must be given to the context in which this law is being released. Freedom of speech and association has been seriously threatened by authorities within Cambodia in terms of, inter alia, the recent defamation and disinformation cases and attempts by authorities to prevent public gatherings held by local NGOs. This law and the timing of its release must be read in light of these events.

The proposed draft law has several provisions which appear to unnecessarily violate the right to peaceful assembly. Of particular concern is the ambiguity surrounding the definition of a “demonstration.” Article 4 defines Peaceful Demonstration as:

Peaceful demonstration is the gathering or procession made by a group of people to demand, protest or express publicly their feelings/sentiments, idea/opinion or will by using peacefully various forms or means.

However, read together with Article 3 which provides that this law does not apply to: “gatherings for the purposes of...promoting awareness for social interests,” the distinction becomes unclear, leaving subjective interpretation open to abuse.

CCHR also expresses concern with Article 14, Section 2 of the draft law, which discusses peaceful demonstrations held on private and collective property. The current restrictions on such demonstrations include a cap of 200 participants, a requirement of notice to the provincial-municipal authorities, and a specified time frame of 6:00am to 6:00pm. These restrictions seriously harm the peoples’ right to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Individuals who wish to hold peaceful demonstrations and gatherings on their property should be allowed to do so freely, without any intervention by the authorities. Any misconduct resulting from such gatherings are governed by existing legislation, relating to, for example, disturbance of the peace, trespass, or destruction of personal property.

Furthermore, chapter 3, in particular Article 16, raises concerns due to its vague terminology. Organisers of such demonstrations, whose identities are recorded pursuant to Article 6, are “responsible for taking appropriate measures to ensure” that the demonstration complies with the law and the preconditions determined prior to the assembly. Whilst Article 21 states that a written warning shall be issued for the organiser(s) of peaceful demonstrations who violate these provisions, there is no explanation as to the consequence(s) following the receipt of a warning.

The draft law as it stands suggests that organiser(s) exert an unachievable level of control over an indeterminate number of people, burdening organisers with full accountability for the obviously unforeseeable factors which could influence the outcome of such an event. The CCHR is concerned that this provision effectively constitutes a hidden bar on peaceful demonstration, by leaving the organisers open to sanction for the unforeseeable acts of those who attend the demonstrations, including, paradoxically, those who attend peaceful demonstrations with the intention of disrupting them and even attacking the demonstrators, this provision places an unjustifiably level of responsibility on the organiser. The extent of the sanction, a warning, is undefined. The CCHR fears that, by leaving organisers open to unspecified sanctions for the unforeseeable acts of others, no one will be willing to organise a peaceful demonstration.

The CCHR reaffirms its support for the existence of a law on Peaceful Demonstration. However, we would insist on the following amendments and clarifications:

• Firstly, the discrepancy between Article 3(3) and Article 4 must be resolved and re-worded to avoid confusion.
• Secondly, gatherings held at places of private or collective property should not be regulated or restricted by authorities, and are especially inappropriate within a law governing peaceful demonstrations. This section is particularly unacceptable given the excessive restrictions previously mentioned.
• Lastly, the CCHR is against the unreasonable obligations placed upon organisers. The draft law should be amended to ensure these responsibilities are not overly onerous. Furthermore, clarification is essential as to the ramifications of being issued a “warning” as this will have major implications for freedom of assembly within Cambodia.

For more information, please contact:
Mr. Ou Virak, President, CCHR
Tel: +855 12 404051
Email: ouvirak@cchrcambodia.org

Union umbrella group calls for changes to draft demonstration law

Friday, 08 May 2009
Written by Khouth Sophakchakrya The Phnom Penh Post

Two articles of the government's draft law place 'unfair restrictions' on people's rights to demonstrate, according union, NGO officials

THE Cambodian Confederation of Unions (CCU) has asked the National Assembly to delete two parts of the draft Law on Peaceful Demonstrations before MPs meet to approve it.

CCU President Rong Chhun told the Post Thursday he sent a letter to the National Assembly making the request.

Clause 1 and Clause 2 of Article 14 of the proposed law define a peaceful protest as a gathering of no more than 200 people. But many demonstrations have more than 200 people, and limiting the number would be an unfair restriction on people's rights, said Rong Chhun, who is also the head of the Cambodian Independent Teachers Association.

He said Article 28 of the law states that public demonstrations can be held at just a single venue in each province, which the authorities would be obliged to build within six months of the bill becoming law.

Demonstrators would not be allowed to take their protest outside the venue, which he said was unjust, adding that scrapping this provision would also save the authorities money.

But the secretary of the National Assembly's Commission on the Protection of Human Rights, CPP member Nhem Thavy, said the number of demonstrators was not important - it was their message that counts.

"The government should not limit the number of demonstrators..."

"Article 14 and Article 28 are not meant to reduce freedom of expression in Cambodia," said Nhem Thavy, adding that he agreed with the provisions in Article 28.

Ensuring peaceful protests

CPP lawmaker Cheam Yeap said Rong Chhun's letter would be considered by the parliament's special commission. But he added that Cambodia needs venues where people can assemble to demonstrate peacefully, claiming that previous marches had ended violently.

"We need to construct these centres for demonstrations to protect social security and public and private property," he said.

"In the past some peaceful demonstrations have resulted in protesters using violence and destroying public and private property."

The law has raised alarm in some circles. Moeun Chhean Nariddh, the director of the Cambodian Institute for Media Studies, said the draft legislation would conflict with the country's obligations as a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 19 of that document states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; Article 20 states that everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.

Moeun Chhean Nariddh said, "The government should not limit the number of demonstrators or insist on a particular place to demonstrate. Instead it should increase the options."

Union asks to remove some clauses from the demonstration law

Friday, May 8, 2009
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata

Rong Chhun, President of the Cambodian Federation of Trade Unions (CFTU), asked Heng Samrin, the president of the National Assembly, to remove Points No. 1 and 2 of Articles 14 and 28 of the draft law on peaceful demonstration. In the afternoon of 07 May 2009, Rong Chhun told The Kampuchea Thmei newspaper that, following his review of the draft law, there are some points that do not guarantee the freedom of assembly and expression, furthermore, Article 14 limits the number of people who can assemble. Rong Chhun added: “We don’t want a law that serves those in power. We want this law to be opened for all people to participate, not just limited to one or two persons, but they can assemble by the tens of thousands.” Rong Chhun said that limiting the number of people who can assemble is contrary to the Cambodian Constitution, the supreme law of the land. If the National Assembly does not remove some of the points in Article 14, this law in fact tightens the people’s freedom rights, and people will lose their freedom to participate in a demonstration.

Rights Party Attacks Demonstration Draft

By Chun Sakada, VOA Khmer
Original report from Phnom Penh
05 May 2008

Human Rights Party President Kem Sokha blasted a new draft law on demonstration that he said would limit the rights of Cambodians to freedom of assembly, especially in seeking redress to governmental wrongdoing.

The draft law has received widespread condemnation from rights groups, especially a clause that limits the number of demonstrators to 200 participants and the time of gatherings from 6 am to 6 pm. The draft law also focuses more responsibility on demonstration organizers “if the demonstration becomes violent and destroys public or private property.”

“The human rights party cannot accept this new draft law on demonstrations, as it is not serving the interest of people or democracy, but the ruling [Cambodian People’s Party] interest,” Kem Sokha said.

The party would seek laws that open more rights and freedoms if it wins July’s general election, he said.

“The new draft law on demonstrations is not widely democratic for the people to express and protest on their grievances and concerns,” said Ny Chakrya, chief of Adhoc’s rights investigation unit.

The people have a right to push the government to solve such issues as the judiciary, corruption, poverty and land disputes, he said.

Prime Minister Hun Sen has welcomed the draft, saying it does not limit peaceful demonstration but helps authorities protect “national security, public order,…public health [and] morale [and] rights and freedom of other people.”

No guarantee of freedom rights in demonstration law?

03 January 2008
By Moeung Tum
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Socheata

The draft law on peaceful demonstration in Cambodia does not guarantee the freedom of speech for Cambodian people.

On 03 January, the Cambodia Independent Teachers’ Association (CITA) sent a letter to the National Assembly asking for the elimination of sub-articles 1 and 2 of Article 14, Section 2 of the draft law on peaceful demonstration.

CITA wrote that it observed that these 2 sub-articles call for the creation of a location where people can express their opinion publicly (i.e., a reserved place for demonstration), with a maximum number people allowed to be present limited to 200 at the most, in order to hold a peaceful demonstration.

Rong Chhun, CITA President, told RFA today that: “I read it already and I reviewed the draft law on peaceful demonstration which contains 30 Articles, divided into 6 Sections. We saw that the content of the law, in almost all sections, there is no guarantee for the freedom rights of the people, allowing them to openly express their opinions during peaceful demonstrations. However, we saw 2 points: sub-articles 1 and 2 which tighten (the freedom rights) a lot. Therefore, we sent a letter asking Samdach Heng Samrin, President of the National Assembly to remove these 2 sub-articles.”

CITA added that for the law to be acceptable, the public can participate in peaceful demonstrations, regardless of their numbers which can be higher than 200, and the demonstrations can be held in any public places.

CITA indicated that it hopes the National Assembly will certainly agree to remove these tight rules included in these 2 sub-articles of the draft law on peaceful demonstration.