Peaceful protests such as the one shown here may be a thing of the past should the government proposed law passes. Under the new provision of the laws, spontaneous protests will be confined in parks and cannot regroup more than 30 protesters. Such a move will essentially trample on the rights of Cambodian people as guaranteed by the Cambodian constitution. (Photo: www.everyday.com.kh)Monday, April 3, 2006
By Whitney Kvasager
THE CAMBODIA DAILY
Mirroring restrictions in tightly-controlled Singapore and drawing fire from observers, the government may soon require that all public demonstrations be held in so-called "freedom parks."
Under the proposed new Law on Public Assembly for a Peaceful Demonstration, drafted by Ministry of Interior officials, all spontaneous protests and demonstrations must be held in government-designated parks.
Demonstrations would be limited to 30 people and could last no longer than four hours, according to a draft of the law. Larger demonstrations held elsewhere, the law stipulates, would have to be approved 10 days in advance by the Ministry of Interior, according to the draft.
Interior Ministry spokesman Khieu Sopheak would not say whether the law was modeled after Singapore's own law, which one foreign diplomat in Phnom Penh said establishes strict parameters for protest locations and the number of people allowed to attend.
"People may be afraid, but [the law] has not been adopted yet so I have no comment," Khieu Sopheak said, adding that he didn't know when the draft law would be approved.
But even the proposed draft has drawn fire from the UN, rights workers and others.
Those interviewed last week said the law conflicts with the freedoms of assembly and speech afforded in the Cambodian Constitution. The term "freedom parks" is also a misnomer for what would essentially serve to contain critics, they said.
A foreign diplomat also said the Cambodian government should avoid laws similar to those in place in Singapore. "Singapore isn't really a bastion of freedom," the diplomat said. "Laws on freedom of expression are quite conservative there."
Sam Rainsy Party lawmaker Son Chhay said many poor villagers traveling to Phnom Penh to protest land grabs in remote areas had the most to lose in the so-called "freedom parks."
"This is really scary," Son Chhay said. "It eliminates their access. The government will continue to allow the rich and powerful people to rob their land," he said, noting that the visibility of land protests in central Phnom Penh was sometimes the only hope that villagers had that officials would take notice and take action.
Sok Sam Oeun, executive director of the legal NGO Cambodian Defenders Project, said that the parks would not be constitutional, but that if they are to be set up, they should be located in central locations.
"If it is located close to a government building, its okay. But if it's in a place that's far away, it makes protests useless," he said.
Sok Sam Oeun said he was skeptical that officials would listen to suggestions during the next public forum to discuss the law. He had declined to participate in the first forum in February, saying his comments would not have been heeded.
"They do not care about our opinion," he said. "We will see. But right now I don’t believe [they want to listen]."
A UN rights office official, speaking on condition of anonymity, also said the law should be rewritten and should reflect the best interests of the public. "Its better that legislation be drafted in a way that’s free," the official said.
Under the proposed new Law on Public Assembly for a Peaceful Demonstration, drafted by Ministry of Interior officials, all spontaneous protests and demonstrations must be held in government-designated parks.
Demonstrations would be limited to 30 people and could last no longer than four hours, according to a draft of the law. Larger demonstrations held elsewhere, the law stipulates, would have to be approved 10 days in advance by the Ministry of Interior, according to the draft.
Interior Ministry spokesman Khieu Sopheak would not say whether the law was modeled after Singapore's own law, which one foreign diplomat in Phnom Penh said establishes strict parameters for protest locations and the number of people allowed to attend.
"People may be afraid, but [the law] has not been adopted yet so I have no comment," Khieu Sopheak said, adding that he didn't know when the draft law would be approved.
But even the proposed draft has drawn fire from the UN, rights workers and others.
Those interviewed last week said the law conflicts with the freedoms of assembly and speech afforded in the Cambodian Constitution. The term "freedom parks" is also a misnomer for what would essentially serve to contain critics, they said.
A foreign diplomat also said the Cambodian government should avoid laws similar to those in place in Singapore. "Singapore isn't really a bastion of freedom," the diplomat said. "Laws on freedom of expression are quite conservative there."
Sam Rainsy Party lawmaker Son Chhay said many poor villagers traveling to Phnom Penh to protest land grabs in remote areas had the most to lose in the so-called "freedom parks."
"This is really scary," Son Chhay said. "It eliminates their access. The government will continue to allow the rich and powerful people to rob their land," he said, noting that the visibility of land protests in central Phnom Penh was sometimes the only hope that villagers had that officials would take notice and take action.
Sok Sam Oeun, executive director of the legal NGO Cambodian Defenders Project, said that the parks would not be constitutional, but that if they are to be set up, they should be located in central locations.
"If it is located close to a government building, its okay. But if it's in a place that's far away, it makes protests useless," he said.
Sok Sam Oeun said he was skeptical that officials would listen to suggestions during the next public forum to discuss the law. He had declined to participate in the first forum in February, saying his comments would not have been heeded.
"They do not care about our opinion," he said. "We will see. But right now I don’t believe [they want to listen]."
A UN rights office official, speaking on condition of anonymity, also said the law should be rewritten and should reflect the best interests of the public. "Its better that legislation be drafted in a way that’s free," the official said.
No comments:
Post a Comment