Corrections to Robert Ehrlich's article on the KR Tribunal

Dear Editor,

Several errors appear in Richard Ehrlich's article, "New Momentum for Cambodia's Khmer Rouge trial? US official says attempt will be made to indict 15 more top cadres"

First, the headline of the article is completely erroneous in light of the errors in the article. Second, I am not a United States official whatsoever, as erroneously described in the article. I am the UN Secretary-General's Special Expert on United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials, a fact reported only later in the article. Third, my comment about 10 to 15 suspects was made only in response to a question about how many suspects were contemplated during the negotiations in the 1990s that led to the creation of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). I emphasized that since then the Cambodian Government has disagreed with that figure.

The article correctly reports on the five indicted persons, one of which has been convicted, three of which are on trial, and one whose fate remains undetermined. In addition to the five persons already indicted, Cases 003 and 004 relate to five additional suspects. In my Bangkok briefing I emphasized that these two cases are now before the Co-Investigating Judges, who will investigate and decide if any of these additional five suspects will be indicted and sent for trial. The international Co-Prosecutor has on several occasions stated publicly that he does not intend to initiate prosecution against any new individuals not already identified in Cases 003 and 004. In my meeting with journalists in Bangkok I said nothing to suggest otherwise.

David Scheffer, UN Secretary-General's Special Expert on United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials"

-----------

Greetings Mr. Scheffer,

Many thanks your response. After you spoke about an additional 15 suspects in your news conference, I see that I mistakenly included them in Cases 003 and 004 -- which actually has only five additional suspects. I now understand that, in response to my later questions, you were still speaking about those *five additional suspects* in those cases, and not the *15*.

As a result, those numbers -- five instead of 15 -- have been fixed in a newer edit of the story, which is now online.

Concerning your other two points: As you know, you are an official -- in this case the UN Secretary-General's Special Expert on United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials -- which you agree was *a fact reported* in this story.

You are also an American (you did not mention any other nationality in your statement, or your response). Placing those two adjectives together in the story, introduces you as a US official, rather than for example, a Cambodian official, or -- if you had a different profession -- a US author, or Cambodian author etc.

As you see, the word "government" does not appear between the two adjectives "US" and "official,* just as they do not appear in the example *US* and *author*.

I'm always open to suggestions from readers, however, to make news stories easier to understand. If some readers, such as yourself, imagine the word *government* invisibly wedged between the adjectives *US* and *official* -- or personally *feel* that it *implies* such an impression -- then I will arrange those adjectives in a way less likely to confuse those readers.

If I knew in advance that you would have such an interpretation in mind, when reading those two adjectives together, I would have included a third *adjective* so it says: *an American UN official.*

As you will see in the newly posted edit, those *three* adjectives are included to introduce you.

Cheers, Richard S. Ehrlich