Son Chhay 'Versus' Sok An: The Battle of the Two Political Heavywieghts: Chhay Forced by Apsara Authority to Sell His Land

Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Editorial by Khmerization
Originally posted at http://khmerization.blogspot.com/

The forcing of MP Son Chhay to sell his land by the Apsara Authority is another example of land grabbing and it shows that land disputes and land corruption had reached the top of the Cambodian leadership. If an MP can be forced to sell his land at peanut price, what else do the poor and the powerless had to defend themselves against such actions.

The Apsara Authority, which is under the chairmanship of Sok An, Deputy Prime Minister of Cambodia, is infamous for confiscating people’s land in Siem Reap. Reports coming out from Siem Reap is that any valuable land around the vicinity of the Angkor areas owned by ordinary people were confiscated by the Apsara Authority using the pretext that the lands are government-owned which had been earmarked for future tourist developments. But the fact of the matter is that the lands are confiscated by Sok An himself and later sold to foreign investors to develop golf courses.

It is a principle and is essential that Son Chhay decided to bring the matter to public and international attention, that is challenging the matter in court. Son Chhay’s court case should be a test case and a fight for all victims of illegal and forced evictions which have taken place through out the country. The court case, though might not be successful because the court is controlled by Sok An himself, should be fought relentlessly, vigorously and publicly.

Sok An cannot be allowed to exercise his powers without checks and balances. His decision to award concessions to Sok Kong’s company to collect tourist fees to Angkor Wat had received criticisms many times before from MP Son Chhay. In fact the Angkor Wat concession is a front for Sok An to connive with Sok Kong in the embezzlement of state revenue. There are approximately 1.5 million tourists visiting Angkor Wat every years. The revenue collected from tourists entry to Angkor Wat is equivalent to $30-$40 million annually, using a $20 fee for each tourist for the calculation. Only 1.5 million dollars of that money was paid to the state treasury. The question is: where do the other $28-$38 million go to? It surely ended up in Sok Kong’s and Sok An’s and Hun Sen’s pockets.

This kind of back-door corruption must not be allowed to continue unquestioned. And Son Chhay’s persistence in pursuing this case has incurred the ire of Sok An which led his Apsara Authority to force Son Chhay to sell his land at peanut price.

Back to Son Chhay’s land dispute, Son Chhay’s court fight is a fight for all victims of land confiscations. It is a symbol of civil disobedience and a fight for basic justice. The case will attract international and media attention because recent forced evictions had attracted widespread public attention, especially from Amnesty International.

The Apsara Authority will use the pretext of development for its reasons for forced evictions and forced sales. But development must be proceeded with regard to human rights and with the aim of poverty reduction. Land owners should be compensated to the value of the market price and an alternative place should be established for their new settlements. Development with forced evictions and land confiscations without being adequately compensated will lead to increase in poverty.

But the fact of the matter is that Sok An and Hun Sen will never care about the welfare of his poor subjects. What matters and what they care is how to fill their pockets with dollars. And the forcing of Son Chhay to sell his land at peanut price is in fact a land confiscation in disguise. And Son Chhay must fight and fight vigorously to the end. That is my advice. Good luck.

No land rights for the ordinary citizen or opposition in Cambodia

SRP MP Son Chhay (L) vs Sok An (R), the powerful right hand man of Strongman Hun Sen

Opinion by Dr. Christina Son

On Friday February 15, opposition MP Son Chhay, has been ordered to appear again in court to contest his appeal more than a year after his last unsuccessful attempt to seek justice over the force removal of his property and transfer of his land in Siemreap province to the ruling CPP controlled Apsara Authority for the sole purpose of developing the Angkor Hotel Resort. This sudden order was not surprising given several outspoken public criticisms recently given by Son Chhay against corrupt government officials and the current political environment aimed clearly at intimidating opposition party members using false legal pretences. As a lawyer and, having worked in Cambodia for many years on land tenureship issues, this dispute illustrates that the Rule of Law is still sadly amiss in Cambodia and I would argue illustrates why offering the poor and marginalised avenues to pursue legal redress or any alternative adequate remedy in Cambodia, as suggested by Amnesty International in their 2006 report, or more recently by the Center for Social Development in encouraging victims of the Khmer Rouge to file civil suits, is futile. As Son Chhay's case clearly illustrates - even a long serving opposition parliamentary member in this country can not protect what is rightfully theirs because the corrupt and politically aligned judiciary system only protects those with powerful and influential connections.

I attended the trial on the morning of the 16 December 2006. As a lawyer I realize that no system is perfect but there are due processes, legal precedents, legislation, particularly the Constitution, that we as legal officers of the court must respect. Regardless of the jurisdiction, our first duty is to the court and to uphold the principles of justice. Thus independence of the judiciary from the executive is critical. What I witnessed that morning was clear manipulation of the court by government officials for the purpose of unjustly evicting, not simply another landowner, but also to intimidate an opposition party member by threatening his assets.

Son Chhay originally bought the 170 x 220 square metre property in Siemreap, his home province on the May 15, 1995. Five months later, on the October 13, 1995, the area was rezoned to allow for the Apsara Authority to create the Angkor Hotel Resort Development project on January 5, 1996. To add officialdom to what really was another vicious land grab scheme by the government, on March 23, 2000 Mr Sok An, a Minister in the Council of Ministers, issued an announcement. This announcement offered compensation in unreasonable terms from 30 cents to 2 dollars per sq metre. Following this announcement, on May 5, 2000, the Second Governor of Siemreap Province, Mr Suy San openly declared, and even advertised through the newspaper, that the Office of Governor will request people with property in the rezoned area to either accept the price offered or they will consider these people to have “abandoned their property”.

This clearly reflects Cambodia's history of impunity to-date and the ridiculous attempt by authorities to "legalise" what clearly is an illegal land grab by the government for corrupt purposes. Unfortunately, in Son Chhay's case, as in most of these cases, many landowners succumbed to the pressure and took the meager compensation; some now forced to live on the streets with their families. Others fought and in some cases achieved a slightly better financial reimbursement but clearly still far removed from to what they were entitled. Others left under threat of further intimidation to themselves and their families. However, Mr Son Chhay as a lawmaker in Cambodia (ironically Son Chhay is author of the anti-corruption legislation that to-date the government refuses to pass), knew that there was no legal basis to bring the matter to court and decided to fight.

Land grabbing is a violation of the right to ownership guaranteed by Article 44 of the Cambodian Constitution. It also a violation of the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions as stipulated in Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which Cambodia is a party. In addition, Article 5 of the Land Law also states clearly that "no-one's property can be taken away if the action is not for the purpose of the public use" and if land is thus decreed to be in the public interest it must be done in accordance with the law and the owner given "just" compensation. Although Cambodia 's Land Law was enacted in 2001, it is not enforced. In fact, many laws are not enforced within the country, illustrating the government's complete disregard of the Rule of Law. While the brunt of this has been felt by the poorer and marginalized sectors of society it is now beginning to seep into other sectors of society affecting anyone including political opponents.

Apsara Authority argued that it was evicting Son Chhay to use the land for the public interest. Son Chhay's lawyer asked what evidence they had to support this claim. No evidence to support the claim of altruistic development was at any time produced. The prosecution and the trial judge should have discharged the case as there was insufficient evidence. In Son Chhay's case Apsara Authority was clearly not developing the land for the public interest. In fact, in court the legal representative for Apsara Authority, flagrantly admitted clearly that the development was for a hotel/resort.

Apsara Authority are very powerful stakeholders in some of the biggest ventures in Cambodia including visitation rights to Angkor Wat amounting to millions a year in revenue. They have little evidence if any to show that they have used these monies to benefit the people of Cambodia. I challenge those reading this article to drive around, past the mesmerizing beauty of the temples and into the villages and judge yourselves how the situation has changed little since the Khmer Rouge period. Children are still malnourished and schools and health care are clearly lacking let alone the necessary infrastructure, such as roads!

Unfortunately Son Chhay is not alone and his case is one of many. As a lawyer I believe in the justice system. I even naively wrote once that trials were an important process to bring to justice perpetrators of human rights abuse and ‘any trail was better than no trial’. I reiterate this now. Politically biased trails are detrimental and destructive to the psyche of the Cambodian people. Land grabbing in Cambodia has increased since 2004 and is now widespread throughout the country affecting hundreds possibly thousands of people. The use of force and intimidation in these illegal evictions is common. When this fails to deter victims, government officials have even pressed criminal charges against them or thrown them in jail. The hope that the Khmer Court tribunal, with international support would help strengthen the judiciary, is quickly fading. The fact remains that a government official, such as Sok Ann, can make an announcement at any time and his word is law. The government’s pledge in December 2004 “to strengthen the rule of law, promote social justice, reduce corruption, eliminate the culture of impunity, and strengthen the culture of peace and the primacy of law” has failed to implement the necessary reforms including a much needed reform of the Supreme Council of Magistracy which should formally act to ensure the independence and effectiveness of the judiciary. Rule of Law – it doesn’t exist in Cambodia !

Phnom Penh February 11, 2008
Dr. Christina Son

For further information contact 61-4-131 99099 or email christina.son@flinders.edu.au