Closing Order of Case 002 against Senior KR Leaders Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, Ieng Sary, Ieng Thirith

In light of the start of trial hearings beginning on 27 June 2011 of Case 002 against the surviving Khmer Rouge senior leaders Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, Ieng Sary and Ieng Thirith, KI Media is posting installations of the public document of the Closing Order of Case 002.  The Closing Order of the Co-Investigating Judges forms the basic document from which all the parties (Co-Prosecutors, Co-Lead Lawyers for all civil parties, Defense Lawyers) will be making their arguments before the Trial Chamber judges (one Cambodian President, 2 Cambodian Judges, 2 UN judges).  Up until now, the hearings involving these four surviving senior Khmer Rouge leaders have been in the Pre-Trial Chamber over issues of pre-trial detention and jurisdictional issues.  Beginning in June 2011, the Trial Chamber will hear the substantive arguments over the criminal charges (e.g. genocide, crimes against humanity, penal code of 1956).  Available in Khmer and French. Contact the ECCC for a free copy. 

 

CLOSING ORDER

of Co-Investigating Judges You Bunleng and Marcel Lemonde

15 September 2010

Prey Sar Worksite (S-24)

Interrogations

397.            Several witnesses described how interrogations were conducted and that some detainees were treated very badly by the staff during interrogations.¹⁷⁹⁴ Duch stated that, in general, S-24 was not a centre where prisoners were interrogated or tortured.¹⁷⁹⁵ However, while he recognised that interrogations may have taken place and that detainees might have been ill-treated during interrogations, he stated that he never instructed the staff of S-24 to carry out interrogations in order to extract confessions.¹⁷⁹⁶

Security

398.            Disappearances of prisoners during the night were common¹⁷⁹⁷ and those who disappeared never returned.¹⁷⁹⁸

399.            Some S-24 detainees were transferred to Choeng Ek for execution,¹⁷⁹⁹ including children.¹⁸⁰⁰ Some prisoners were also transferred from S-24 to S-21.¹⁸⁰¹ Duch admitted that at least 571 of them were transferred.¹⁸⁰² In the Duch judgment of Case File 001, the Trial Chamber notes:¹⁸⁰³ "According to Expert David CHANDLER, one of the characteristics that distinguished S-24 from S-21 was that individuals held at the former had the possibility of release. The Accused stated, however, that S-24 detainees were seldom released and that all were generally destined for execution regardless of their classification. The Accused testified that he provided those running S-24 with a standing order to execute its detainees in accordance with CPK policy. S-24 detainees slated for execution whose confessions were needed were first sent to S-21, while those whose confessions were not required were sent directly to Choeung Ek for execution. The Accused typically made this decision, though his subordinates could send detainees directly to Choeung Ek when their confessions were clearly unnecessary, as was the case with children. [internal citations omitted]".

***

414. Eleven (11) civil parties were declared admissible with regards to S24 Prey Sar,¹⁸⁰⁴ since the alleged crimes described in the application were considered as being more likely than not to be true, pursuant to Internal Rule 23 bis (4). These civil parties have provided sufficient elements tending to establish prima facie personal harm as a direct consequence of the crimes committed at S24 Prey Sar.