Weak rule of law, Judiciary not independent, Freedom of speech and assembly undermined: Surya Subedi on Hun Xen's Cambodia

Judiciary, Rights Efforts ‘Weak’: UN Rights Envoy

By Heng Reaksmey, VOA Khmer
Original report from Phnom Penh
02 October 2009

The Cambodian government rejected a report by the UN’s human rights envoy, who characterized the country’s judicial system and human rights efforts as “weak.”

Suriya Subedi, the UN special rapporteur for human rights, replaces Yash Ghai, who had a prickly relationship with the government and especially Prime Minister Hun Sen.

Government spokesman Khieu Kanharith said Friday Subedi “did not see the whole thing.” He added: “He listened to lazy staffs who work here, and he did not check.”

Subedi said in an October report: “The rule of law is weak in the country. The judiciary is not as independent as it should be. Some of the core political rights such as the freedom of expression and peaceful assembly have been undermined.”

Subedi said Cambodia’s defamation laws have gone beyond a permissible level in restrictions on the freedom of expression under the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Cambodia is a party.

Ny Chakriya, chief of investigation section for the rights group Adhoc, said that in light of the report the government should review its human rights situation.

“It is simple for the government to deny the UN’s report, but the most important thing is for the government to consider what [Subedi] raised in his report,” he said. “The government denial is unacceptable.”

Yim Sovann, spokesman for the opposition Sam Rainsy Party, agreed with the report, saying, “many UN representatives in Cambodia are always raising the same human rights issues in Cambodia.”

Culture of Compromise Seen Hurting Courts

By Men Kimseng, VOA Khmer
Original report from Washington
18 August 2009

Legal action, compromise and asking for pardon to end disputes have become an integral part of Cambodian politics, effectively and commonly used in past several years.

Since 2005, the nation’s courts have seen 17 cases that monitors label political in nature, stemming from border issues, corruption, defamation, disinformation and incitement. The cases have ranged from local politicians and rights activists to the prime minister and senior-level opposition leaders.

The new trend has met with mixed reaction. There are those who say such cases are an improvement over the use of weapons to solve disputes. But there are others who would prefer the courts are not involved in politics, or legal issues used as a pretext to intimidate critics of the government.

Kem Sokha, president of the Human Rights Party, an opposition party with three seats in the National Assembly, was once imprisoned briefly as the head of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights; he was charged with defamation of the government for hanging up a banner for 2005’s Human Rights Day.

“My release at the time was the result of political compromise, with intervention from Cambodians inside and outside the country, as well as international intervention,” Kem Sokha told VOA Khmer by phone last week. “I see this as not a practice that we want. We want to use a legal system where everybody is under the law, as a democratic principle with no one above it.”

Rong Chhun, president of the Cambodian Independent Teachers Association, who was once involved in a court case similar to Kem Sokha’s, said the court’s lack of independence and its service to the ruling Cambodian People’s Party force compromises the other side usually doesn’t want.

“The culture of begging for pardon, and after the pardoning one turning to support or follow a powerful individual is not a good practice,” he said. “But it is understandable, based on dependency and injustice in our legal system.”

The practice has filtered all the way to Cambodia’s remote areas. In Ratanakkiri province, Pen Bona, an investigator for the rights group Adhoc, was removed from his position, via pressure from the court.

“The culture of compromise and begging for pardon is not right,” he said from Phnom Penh, where he now works in the group’s home office. “It is unlawful, and we absolutely don’t want this. Those who are wrong must be punished. However, we can only do that in a system where there is real justice.”

The prevailing system has also affected the highest reaches of politics, when, for example, Sam Rainsy Party lawmaker Mu Sochua was fined for defamation of Prime Minister Hun Sen last month.

Mu Sochua, who is also the party’s deputy secretary-general, was fined more than $4,000 by Phnom Penh Municipal Court, in court fines and in compensation to Hun Sen. She has vowed to appeal but does not rule out the option of a compromise.

“Compromising is an option if it gives dignity to both sides,” she said. “But if the compromise is to make one party, especially the victim, lose its dignity, as in writing a letter to apologize, this is not a compromise. Without a compromise that gives honor to both sides, the court is a better option.”

The case draws lots of condemnation both nationally and internationally expressing concern that the country might plunge into dictatorship.

Hun Sen, meanwhile, has lashed out of critics of the case, which he brought against Mu Sochua after she sued him for defamation, for allegedly degrading remarks made in a speech in April.

“Those of you who would like to issue a statement, both Khmer and foreigners, I would call you stupid, dumb and ignorant of the law,” Hun Sen said in a speech last week, lambasting critics. “You only recognize rights of the opposition not lawful rights of those in power.”

There are other cases. Twenty-two military officials are suing another SRP lawmaker. One opposition journalist has been jailed for defamation while another editor promised to shutter his paper to avoid the same fate.

“In a case where someone says sorry and admits his mistake, it is enough,” Phay Siphan, spokesman for the Council of Ministers, told VOA Khmer. “Firstly, the government’s stance is to show what is right and wrong. Secondly, those who pass judgment are not the executive or legislative bodies. It is the judiciary body.”

Phay Siphan denied government influence over the courts, despite critics who note that the opposition rarely wins cases that appear political to begin with.

“I have never received [government] pressure in more than 10 years on the job,” Mong Monychakriya, a Supreme Court judge, said. “I solve a case based on my own merit, as the law permits.”

Some legal professionals, meanwhile, say politicians should leave the judicial system alone, to ensure its independence.

“We must follow the law and its procedure, once lawmakers give power to the court and the court is independent of political influence,” said Hong Kimsuon, an attorney for the Cambodian Defenders Project. “This is a decision that would benefit the whole population. If it’s a penal case, and [both sides] compromise and withdraw based on compromise and fear of influence, this is not a good practice.”

Int'l watchdogs wage war of words over editor's punishment

Thursday, 02 July 2009
The Phnom Penh Post

Hang Chakra must be freed and then articles 62 and 63... must be amended.

INTERNATIONAL watchdogs have joined the chorus of criticism targeting the jailing of opposition newspaper editor Hang Chakra, who was sentenced last Friday to one year in prison after a Phnom Penh court found him guilty of spreading false information.

In a statement Tuesday, Amnesty International called for the government to "squash" the conviction of Hang Chakra and hold an immediate retrial, claiming Friday's proceedings fell short of international legal standards.

"This case demonstrates the absence of an independent judiciary in Cambodia, and the increasing intolerance of dissent and criticism within Cambodia's top echelons of power," Amnesty researcher Brittis Edman said in the statement.

The Phnom Penh Municipal Court sentenced Hang Chakra, editor-in-chief of the opposition-aligned Khmer Machas Srok newspaper, to a one-year prison term and fined him 9 million riels (US$2,161) for disinformation.

The case was filed in response to a series of articles published in April and May that alleged corruption on the part of officials working under Deputy Prime Minister Sok An.

What the case showed, Edman said, was that the laws governing press freedom in the Kingdom were vague and were now being abused to "harass, intimidate and even jail" government critics.

The France-based Reporters Without Borders agreed, saying that Prime Minister Hun Sen's 2007 decision to decriminalise defamation had been effectively reversed by the use of the UNTAC Criminal Code, rather than the more liberal 1995 Press Law, which does not allow jail sentences.

"His government has now regrettably abused a law about disinformation that was inherited from the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC)," the group said in a statement Tuesday.

"Hang Chakra must be freed, and then Articles 62 and 63 of the criminal code bequeathed by the UN must be amended."

The two statements came following a similar request from the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, which said Cambodian courts should not rely on "outdated laws" to prosecute defamation cases.

Jail time for journalists
Yeng Virak, executive director of the Community Legal Education Centre, said that a one-year jail term was disproportionate even if Hang Chakra was guilty.

"We have many ways of handling journalists when they make mistakes. We can have them make corrections when they publish disinformation," he said.

"Using the law to imprison journalists is not right."

But Council of Ministers spokesman Phay Siphan said international watchdogs should learn more about the particulars of the Hang Chakra case before passing judgement, adding that many journalists still lacked "professionalism".

"International [organisations] should learn a little more about why that person is in jail, and how many articles and what type of articles were [published]," he said.

"They insulted people, they misled people."