Cambodia terror trial sentences criticised

Friday, February 18, 2011
By Alma Mistry
Radio Australia

Cambodia's justice system is being criticised after three foreign nationals were sentenced to eight years in jail under anti-terrorism laws.

Last year, Cambodian police arrested three men who allegedly sent a letter to the Australian, British and American embassies in Phnom Penh, threatening a terrorist attack.

Further investigation indicates the letter warned the embassies about four refugees from India and Burma, accusing them of links to Al Qaeda, and said they were planning an attack on the embassies.

Six signatures - with first names only - ended the letter.

No sentencing outside the courtroom?

Mob attack in Phnom Penh (Photo: Koh Santepheap)

30 March 2010
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata

During a press conference, Hem Dararith, the deputy district governor of Dangkao, told reporters that he is asking the public to stop using their anger to beat up and kill the culprits outside the court system because Cambodia’s Constitution stipulates that there should not be death penalty. Hem Dararith made this declaration during a press conference held on 29 March 2010 at the Dangkao district police station when the authority was putting on display one the culprits who escaped death from a motorcycle robbery. Prior to the killing, the three thieves robbed a new motorcycle from two sisters on 25 March 2010. Hem Dararith told the public that, if such incident takes place again and should the public arrest the perpetrators, they should turn the culprits to the authority so that they can be dealt with the law and let the law decides the case, the public should not perform anything illegal.

Judicial Independence Is The Key To Reducing Defamation Lawsuits[-Travesty of Justice is the norm under Hun Sen's Cambodia ... just like under the KR]

Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission

Cambodia: Judicial Independence Is The Key To Reducing Defamation Lawsuits Against Critics And Upholding Freedom Of Expression

Prime Minister Hun Sen is utilising much of the country’s electronic media to assert his leadership of the country and send out messages to his people through his public speeches at different functions. Now and again in such speeches he rebukes his critics and makes disparaging remarks and even or threats against them. At times, such threats have been accompanied by legal action. Such legal action has now become part of Cambodia’s political landscape as Hun Sen himself and other powerful people in his government have sued Members of Parliament (MPs) from the opposition, journalists and human rights defenders for defamation, disinformation and/or incitement. Over recent months, such lawsuits have multiplied.

Mu Sochua, an MP from the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP), sued Hun Sen for defamation. Hun Sen then counter-sued Mu and her lawyer, Kong Sam Onn, for the same offence, following their remarks against him at a press conference. A total of 22 army officers have sued Ho Vann, another MP from the opposition SRP, also for defamation, after Ho had made remarks critical of the degrees they had obtained from a Vietnamese military institute, although the newspaper that had reported his remarks later published his correction. A number of officials working for a Deputy Prime Minister have sued the editor of a newspaper for its stories implicating them in corruption. A student living in Boeung Kak Lake area where residents are facing eviction has been charged and sentenced for writing slogans critical of the government and the company which are responsible for that eviction on the outside wall of his house. Moeung Son, the leader of an NGO called the Khmer Civilisation Foundation has sued a TV presenter, Soy Sopheap, who is very close to Hun Sen, for his remarks critical of him, only to be sued in turn by the government for his remarks critical of the installation of lighting in the country’s famous Angkor Wat temple.

Except for two, all these lawsuits have been filed by powerful figures in the government and by the government. All have used the authority of the government to get back at their critics. In the government’s lawsuits in the past, defendants have all been convicted or have been compelled to apologise to avoid conviction, unless there was strong pressure from inside and outside the country for their release. Some have even fled the country.

Over the last four years the leader of the opposition SRP, Sam Rainsy, was sentenced in absentia after fleeing abroad. He was granted amnesty only to be sued later in 2008 by a senior minister for defamation. Thanks to pressure, the latest lawsuit against him in the Cambodian court was dropped, but that minister has still sued him in a French court as Sam has a dual Cambodian - French citizenship. A broadcaster, Mam Sonando, was arrested twice. Three human rights activists were arrested and a number of others fled the country. Thanks to pressure and their apologies of sort, the broadcaster and human rights activists were released. Some journalists were sued and one was arrested in 2008. Among those journalists several have fed the country. A university teacher and two ordinary people were arrested and had to linger in jail. The teacher was released on bail in March 2009 pending an appeal. In their confrontation with the powerful, the fate of those weak people is no different from that of an egg hitting a rock.

This past experience does not bode well for the defendants in the recent lawsuits. Moeung Son, fearing imminent arrest fled the country. The court has now dropped the charge against Hun Sen in the opposition MP Mu Sochua’s lawsuit against him. In contrast the same court is laying charges against her in his counter-lawsuit against and is requesting the lifting of Mu’s parliamentary immunity for the purpose. Because of such outcomes favourable to the powerful, those lawsuits have further deepened fears that they are eroding freedom of expression and the courts are being used to muzzle government critics

According to the constitution of Cambodia, there is supposed to be a separation of powers and the judiciary is supposed to be independent. Yet in practice, because of various defects, there is no separation of powers and the judiciary is not independent. Almost all, the prosecutors and judges are members of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP). The President or Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Dith Munty, is a member of its standing and central committees. Recently, the director of the court of Phnom Penh, Chiev Keng, has been appointed advisor to the president of the Council of Ministers’ Council of Jurists, Sok An, who is a deputy prime minister. The director of the court of Kandal province, Khieu Sameth, and the director of the court of Takeo, Sin Dim, have been appointed advisors to the President of the National Assembly, Heng Samrin, who is the Honorary President of the CPP.

Because of their lack of independence, their rulings in favour of the powerful in lawsuits against their critics, and other defects, courts are widely seen as being used to ‘prosecute political opponents and other critics of the government.’ Though it has denied the judiciary’s lack of independence, the government seems to have recognized, at least implicitly, this serious flaw when, in October 2008, Deputy Prime Minister Sok An announced he was to take action “to enforce discipline and make sure the courts are independent.

In its review in May 2009 of Cambodia’s implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, a UN review committee, noted this lack of independence and effectiveness of the judicial system which, it said, “hinders the full enjoyment of human rights including economic, social and cultural rights.” The committee urged the Cambodian government, among other thongs, “to intensify its efforts to modernize and improve the work of the judiciary."

This assessment shows that little has been done to ensure judicial independence. The recent appointment of judges as advisors to the government and the National Assembly has not helped. The latest decisions of the Phnom Penh court to press the charge against opposition MP Mu Sochua and the lifting of her parliamentary immunity and to drop the charge against Prime Minister Hun Sen in their mutual defamation in their recent suit and counter-suit has only highlighted this lack of judicial independence.

This status of the judiciary is totally unacceptable in a country which is supposed to be a liberal democracy governed by the rule of law, and which has undertaken to guarantee and protect human rights, including freedom of expression, and establish an independent judiciary for the purpose. With an increase in the recourse to the due process of law, instead of violent means to suppress criticism, it is more imperative than ever that Cambodia establish an independent judiciary. All constitutional institutions, that is, the Government, the Parliament, the Judiciary itself, the Supreme Council of the Magistracy, the Constitutional Council, the King, and also the legal profession, should discharge their respective duties to bring about this independence.

This whole task would require a comprehensive plan. The following are but a few measures that should be taken as a matter of priority. The law on the statute of judges and prosecutors (altogether belonging to the same magistrate corps), which the country’s Constitution has specifically stipulated, should be enacted without any further delay. It is unacceptable that 16 years after the promulgation of that Constitution in 1993, this particular law has not yet seen the light of day, in contrast to the laws respectively on the statute of civil servants and the statute of members of the armed forces, which are not mentioned in the same Constitution, which were speedily enacted in the mid-1990s.

The judge’s act should clearly stipulate the independence of prosecutors and judges and secure their tenure. It should guarantee and protect their irremovability, and stipulate that they may not be transferred to another position or court without their consent. It should also prohibit their affiliation to political parties. There is no such guarantee for judges and prosecutors at the moment. Almost all of them are affiliated to the ruling CPP. They can be, and have actually been, transferred without their consent. Furthermore, their appointment by the King has shown a strong influence of the government when it has been made by the Minister of Justice and approved by the Supreme Council of the Magistracy (SCM) while it should have been made, as stipulated in the Constitution, by this SCM itself.

The King has a constitutional duty to ensure the independence of the judiciary and he has the SCM, which he chaired, to assist him in this task. The SCM should guarantee and protect this independence and respect the irremovability of judges and prosecutors. It should effectively enforce its Code of Conduct for Judges, and establish fair and transparent disciplinary measures and procedure against them, and also a complaint mechanism and procedure that are easily accessible to the public. It should also challenge any interference in the work of all courts of law and in the independence of judges and prosecutors at the Constitutional Council. At the moment, the SCM has not carried out this task and has shown no resistance to pressure from outside. It has failed to defend the independence of the judiciary.

The SCM has its own structural flaws. It is an integral part of the judiciary and should also be independent. Yet it is not, when most of its nine members are affiliated to the ruling CPP and one ex-officio member, the president of the Supreme Court, is a member of the standing and central committee of that party. The Minister of Justice, and not the SCM, is running the SCM secretariat, and in effect this minister runs this supreme judicial body. In addition the same minister, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, may order the prosecution of suspects. This order may be legal but it is interference in the work of the prosecution which, according the Constitution, belongs to the judiciary and is therefore independent, and which has exclusive prosecuting power. It is therefore unconstitutional. The SCM should now run its own secretariat and the Minister of Justice’s order to prosecutors should be ceased.

It would be a further help to the independence of the judiciary if training of judicial officers could be entrusted with the SCM. At the moment the Royal Academy for Judicial Professions which trains judges, prosecutors and court clerks is placed under the Council of Ministers and its leadership is composed of officials who are members of the ruling party. Furthermore, the academy’s trainees are urged to vote for that party and upon their graduation, they are also urged to be its members. All these practices should cease, and independence and impartiality, among other ethical values, should be well inculcated in them instead.

Furthermore, the SCM had not been properly formed when three of its members, who are judges, are appointed, and not elected by their peers as stipulated in the law on its organization and functioning. This appointment that has been made since the creation of the SCM in 1994 is supposed to be a temporary arrangement, pending the organisation of the required election .This election cannot be held before the enactment of the Law on the Statute of Judges, but this law has not been enacted yet. This prolonged delay of 16 years, and the continued holding up of the election of those three members is simply unreasonable and unacceptable. They have made the legitimacy of the SCM questionable. Yet this body with dubious legitimacy has appointed three members of the Constitutional Council. The Law on the Stature of Judges should be enacted and the subsequent election of those three SCM members should proceed without any further delay.

For its part, the Constitutional Council (CC) which is the guardian of the Constitution should uphold the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary as stipulated in the Constitution. So far no case of violation of these constitutional provisions has been raised with the CC although there are instances of such violation. The recent appointment of judges as advisors to the government and to the National Assembly is the latest case of violation.

As the law on the CC stands now, only the King, the Prime Minister, the President of the National Assembly, the President of the Senate, one tenth at least of Members of Parliament or one quarter at least of Senators may file a request for the constitutional review of acts of parliament before and after they come into force. Courts may also file such a request but for laws that have already come into force. Ordinary people may also file a constitutional complaint through the President of the National Assembly, the President of the Senate, one tenth at least of Members of Parliament or one quarter at least of Senators. Regulations or acts of government and decisions of state institutions are outside the CC’s jurisdiction, except when they may affect the rights of litigants.

Litigants in court may file a request for the constitutional review of any provision of the law or any decision of state institutions that they claim affects their rights, through the concerned court and then the Supreme Court. So far, this particular procedure is not widely known, and no litigant has filed any constitutional complaint against decisions of state institutions though there are such decisions that affect their rights and also the independence of the judiciary. Eviction orders issued by different local authorities and courts have affected evictees’ rights to housing and just compensation and their constitutionality should have been challenged at the CC. Yet no constitutional complaint has been filed against such decisions even when eviction cases have been brought to court.

There is a need to raise the awareness of this procedure among the public at large and among the legal procession in particular, so that they can make use of it to protect litigants’ rights and contribute to strengthening the independence of the judiciary. The jurisdiction of the CC and the constitutional complaint procedure should be enlarged to cover not only acts of parliament but also decisions of state institutions. The President of the National Assembly, the President of the Senate, Members of Parliament and Senators, as well as the public, should have power to file constitutional complaints against not only acts of parliament, which is the case at the moment, but also decisions of state institutions.

The CC, like the SCM, suffers from lack of independence and has dubious legitimacy. It has nine members, three nominated by the King, three by the National Assembly and three by the SCM. Almost all its nine members are affiliated to the ruling party. The nomination of its three members by the SCM has dubious legitimacy when the legitimacy of the SCM itself is dubious since three of the SCM’s own members are not elected as they should be.

In order for the judiciary to be independent, it is imperative that these two top state institutions themselves, the SCM and the CC, be independent and have unquestionable legitimacy. Their respective members’ affiliation to political parties should be prohibited. The Constitutional Council should be more active and act on its own to defend the Constitution, the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary and human rights.

In order to ensure its own legitimacy and that of the SCM, the Constitutional Council should declare that the prolonged delay in enacting the law on the statute of judges is an omission, and this omission is unconstitutional. In this ruling it should set a deadline for the enactment of this law on the statute of judges and for the organisation of the election of three judges to serve as members of the SCM.

With independence and unquestionable legitimacy and enlarged jurisdiction, the Constitutional Council can effectively ensure the constitutionality of all acts of parliament and decisions of state institutions, uphold the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary, including the independence of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy, courts of law and judges and prosecutors. With such independence, courts cannot be easily used to persecute members of the opposition and other government critics, contributing thereby to reducing the government’s defamation and other lawsuits against them and, in the end, to upholding freedom of expression.

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

Curse you, evil land-grabbers and land thieves!

Land dispute victims in Siem Reap during a traditional ceremony put a curse on the person who stole their land.

Villagers curse stolen land

Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Written by Chrann Chamroeun
The Phnom Penh Post

CURSED LAND
Local rights group Adhoc, in their 2008 year-end review, reported a more than threefold jump over the previous year, from 40 to 125, in land disputes in which members of the armed forces were implicated in illegal conduct.

A new pattern of superstition has emerged as a last resort for victims of land grabs, as government inaction sends people to new levels of desperation

HUNDREDS of villagers from Lor Peang village in Banteay Meanchey province gathered together last week to perform a traditional ceremony in which they put a curse on the people who stole their land.

"We prayed and burned incense and cursed whoever stole our land to perish," villager Sgnuon Nhoeun told the Post Sunday. She said that using old-fashioned superstitious techniques had been the last choice for the villagers, who felt betrayed by the inaction of government and legal officials.

"The reason that we have this ceremony is because we feel helpless in the face of local authorities and the judicial system," she said.

"One person who stole our land died in a traffic accident last year after we made a similar curse," she said, adding that villagers had also planted small trees on the stolen land.

"Those who stole our land will fade like the leaves we plant on it," she said.

According to Sgnuon Nhoeun, Lor Peang villagers had sold around half of their land to development group KDC. Instead of taking half of the land, however, the company had taken the lot. The dispute resulted in the imprisonment last Novemeber of two of the village's representatives who had protested against the company.

"The villagers have conducted ceremonies like this because they believe it is their last choice. They have no hope in the local authorities or court officials to find justice for them," Sam Chankea, a coordinator for the rights group Adhoc, told the Post Sunday.

Old-fashioned curses reborn

Miech Ponn, a researcher at the Buddhist Institute and an adviser to the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts, said that villagers had not conducted superstitious ceremonies like this in a long time.

"People feel no hope and have no belief in the judicial system, so they have decided to mark the occasion by cursing corrupt court officials to comfort their feelings," the 75-year-old said.

"It is not part of Buddhism, but there is nothing wrong with it. People have the right to their beliefs according to constitutional and penal law," he added.

Court Officials Set for Four-Year Rotation

By Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer
Original Report from Washington
14 January 2009

National judges and prosecutors will be rotated to new posts following a meeting of the Supreme Council of Magistracy Wednesday, part of reform efforts to reduce corruption.

“Every four years, or a little bit more, there needs to be a change to another place,” Justice Minister Ang Vongwatana said. “Those who are in the same place for a long time, they know all the people, the chief of the court knows all the people, knows the businessmen, and the businessmen know them.”

Friendships grow and make work difficult, he said. “So that’s why there is the principal that they should not stay in one place.”

Cambodia’s courts face continual criticism of political bias and corruption, and donors have pushed for reform, something court officials say they are working on.

No details were immediately available on changes at Phnom Penh Municipal Court, where many of the country’s key trials are held, but Ang Vongwatana said around four or five judges and prosecutors would be moved.

An observer close to the Supreme Council of Magistracy said Tuesday Phnom Penh court’s chief prosecutor, Ouk Savuth, would be moved to the Appeals Court, as deputy-general prosecutor, while his deputy, Yet Chakrya, would replace him.

Yet Chakrya was transferred from Banteay Meanchey provincial court and currently serves as a reserve prosecutor for the Khmer Rouge tribunal.

No impartial tribunal in Cambodia

January 14, 2009
By Lao Mong Hay
UPI Asia Online

Column: Rule by Fear

Hong Kong, China — Cambodia is bound by the Paris Peace Agreements, which were concluded in 1991 to end a protracted war in the country and which obligate Cambodia to adhere to international human rights norms and standards. These include, among other things, the creation of an independent judiciary and the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
All the specified international human rights norms and standards have now become an integral part of Cambodia's Constitution. This Constitution spells out clearly that Cambodia shall recognize and respect human rights as stipulated in all relevant international instruments. It provides for the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, the guarantee of this judicial independence by the king with the assistance of a supreme judicial body called the Supreme Council of the Magistracy, and the protection of human rights by the king and the judiciary.

However, despite all the constitutional guarantees and protections mentioned above, in reality the Cambodian people have not enjoyed these rights, including the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent and impartial tribunal. There is no such tribunal as yet in Cambodia.

Since the abandonment of communism in the early 1990s, the Cambodian judiciary has not proved to be independent despite continued criticism over its lack of this important attribute. It is very much under political control. Most, if not all, members are affiliated to the ruling party, with the chief justice of the Supreme Court being a member of the party's standing and central committees.

More recently the Cambodian authorities have recognized the obvious, though indirectly. Last October a deputy prime minister, Sok An, announced that the government “will be preparing a workshop on the law and courts,” saying that the government had heard “bad rumors about courts in Cambodia” and it was going “to work very hard to change that.” He added that the government “needed to enforce discipline and make sure that the courts are independent."

As for competency, the courts have recently been found to be short of it. Last year the Senate's Legislation and Justice Committee conducted an investigation into the functioning of the courts and the legal knowledge of judicial officials. After the completion of the investigation in a number of courts in November, its chairman, Ouk Bunthoeun, revealed some of the committee's findings, one of which was the inadequate knowledge base of these officials. "The judges and the prosecutors are facing difficulties implementing the laws …There are a lot of technical terms that (they) don't understand," he said.

The Cambodian courts have also been found to lack impartiality. This lack comes from their lack of independence and from corruption. A survey by Transparency International released in February 2008 found that the judiciary, in tandem with the police, was the most corrupt institution in Cambodia.

A study by an NGO released earlier, in December 2007, said, “ The primary functions of the courts continue to be: 1) To prosecute political opponents and other critics of the government; 2) To perpetuate impunity for state actors and their associates; 3) To promote the economic interests of the rich and powerful.” Ouk Bunthoeun, mentioned above, said his committee had also found the bias and corruption that the courts have been accused of.

The dismal status of the courts of law and the ensuing denial of constitutional right to a fair and public hearing by an independent, competent and impartial tribunal should no longer be tolerated. The king of Cambodia should discharge his constitutional duty, get the Supreme Council of the Magistracy which he chairs, and seek support from the government and the Parliament to ensure the independence of the judiciary.

As the first step, the law on the status of judges and prosecutors that the country's Constitution has specifically stipulated and the government has long promised, was enacted and effectively enforced. This law should affirm and protect the constitutional immovability and independence of this group of judicial officials so as to ensure the security of their tenure. It should prohibit their affiliation to any political party while their tenure is secure.

The Supreme Council of the Magistracy should free itself from political control as well and, like judges and prosecutors, its members should not be affiliated to any political party. This council should effectively enforce its code of ethics for judges and prosecutors and establish the procedure and mechanism for complaints against these judicial officials which should be easily accessible to the public.

In the meantime, the leadership of the country should respect the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary, and end their control over it. Furthermore, this branch of government should be allocated adequate resources so that it can properly provide justice and protect human rights.
--
(Lao Mong Hay is a senior researcher at the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong. He was previously director of the Khmer Institute of Democracy in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, and a visiting professor at the University of Toronto in 2003. In 1997, he received an award from Human Rights Watch and the Nansen Medal in 2000 from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.)

“My Lord Court: no money, no solution”, “Lovely court: no dollar, no solution”: Corrupt court system under Hun Sen's regime

In Courts, Power Can Trump Law

By Pin Sisovann, VOA Khmer
Original from Phnom Penh
15 December 2008

Click here to listen to the Khmer audio program

In recent years, battles in Cambodia’s courts have often been fought between a unified poor against money, the powerful or an unjust judge.

Rights groups have observed that when a large group attempts to defend its representatives, courts will postpone questioning or public hearings, a reflection of a trend for courts to side not with truth or law but with power or unified force.

Many of these cases involve land disputes, where the poor are often victims, said Thun Saray, director of the rights group Adhoc.

“If they want justice, they have to have a balance of power, or as much money as the other side,” he said. “The poor, who don’t have the balance of money or power, they will lose for sure. They can do nothing but unite to fight injustice.”

Rights groups continue to appeal to the government for reform of the judiciary, noting that injustice leads to social instability.

Thun Saray said he has noticed that when hundreds of people go to the courts to back their representatives, they are banned from joining proceedings, or proceedings are postponed.

Early last week, Licadho rights worker Chheng Sophors said, more than 300 villagers in Kratie province’s Snuol district gathered to support four men they feared would be arrested and taken in for questioning. The courts held off from any arrests, but Chheng Sophors said he still worried they will be taken in secret.

“If we all didn’t go with them, we were worried [the courts] would have arrested the four men,” said Lech Kreunh, a Stieng minority from Snuol district’s Kuychirung village.

This happens often. When many supporters follow potential suspects, “usually the courts don’t dare to proceed,” said Pen Bonnar, Adhoc coordinator for Ratanakkiri province.

The instinct to gather together to protect each other lies in traditions of the defense of common interest in collective communities, he added.

Kem Sophorn, a judge and inspector at the Ministry of Justice, said such behavior undermined Cambodia’s rule of law, where a Supreme Council of Magistracy, the king and the government work to ensure justice for citizens.

“Our judicial system is getting better,” he said. “The Ministry of Justice has investigated all cases in which complaints were filed. People who take the law into their our hands are wrong.”

When courts call someone in for questioning, they are not necessarily arresting them, he said. “By law, we don’t need to call them. We could just issue a warrant and have them arrested by police, while other villagers wouldn’t know.”

Rights groups should not encourage people to dishonor the law or mobilize them to take the law into their own hands, he said. Critics should identify specific judges or cases, but general criticism won’t solve the problem.

Such advice is little consolation for people like Sren Kert, 48, who fled to Phnom Penh last week, worried he would be arrested when he was called in for questioning at a court.

“They wanted to arrest me because I stood out in a protest,” he said. “They didn’t take into consideration the fact that land belongs to all villagers who protested.”

He repeated a few sayings that circulate about a court system that is viewed as corrupt and unfair: “My Lord Court: no money, no solution” and “Lovely court: no dollar, no solution.”

“It is true,” he said.

People don’t trust the courts, which is why they amass in large groups, said Licadho founder Kek Galabru.

“Three or four hundred of them will come to tell the court that they support the suspects who are being tried,” she said. “They have done nothing wrong by showing their support, and it is within their rights.”

Kek Galabru denied the charges that rights agencies encouraged villagers to take the law into their own hands.

“Organizations only give them consultation about the law, explaining to them legal procedures,” Adhoc’s Thun Saray said. “It has been their own idea to unite.”

Suon Visal, secretary-general of the Cambodian Bar Association, said properly defending some cases can be difficult, meanwhile, because alleged victims or suspects are often ill-prepared. Villagers may not have the legal understanding their opponents do, making it difficult to win at a case that requires deep investigation.

“Often they don’t prepare themselves to fight for justice,” he said. “For example, the court asks for some legal requirements, and they don’t do it. When it comes to the hearing, they don’t have evidence; they lose. They only rely on the truth, so it causes a lot of difficulty for the lawyer.”

Welcome to Cambodia: the only country in the world where pedophiles can have their prison sentence reduced

Thomas Wayne Rapanos (Photo: AP)

Cambodia cuts term for convicted US child molester

2008-12-05
AP

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (AP) - An American man convicted of sexually abusing two young Cambodian girls had his prison term reduced, a court official said Friday.

An Appeals Court panel cut Thomas Wayne Rapanos' prison term to one year for molesting two girls, aged 12 and 16.

Rapanos, 55, of Chicago, Illinois, was originally sentenced to 2 1/2 years by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in August.

Appeals Court judge Thou Mony said he ordered the shorter sentence during a closed-door session Thursday. He refused to comment on why he made the decision.

Cambodia has long been a magnet for foreign pedophiles, and its courts have stepped up action against sex offenders in recent years.

Police arrested Rapanos in March during a raid on his guesthouse room in the capital of Phnom Penh, where they found him in the company of the girls.

Ministry Wraps Up Court Investigation

By Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer
Washington
04 December 2008

Click here to listen to the Khmer audio program

The Ministry of Justice has completed a one-day investigation into possible wrongdoings in Kampong Speu provincial court, but officials said Wednesday they were not ready to release their findings.

Residents of the province had complained that local officials of the Ministry of Environment were abusing the courts, but Ministry of Justice investigator So Chanthy said it was too early to comment.

“When I’m finished with legal actions, I can freely answer your questions,” he said.

Kampong Speu Governor Kang Hearng and a senior police official had met with ministry investigators during a single-day inquiry, he said.

The investigation comes following allegations that the courts were supporting illegal logging and extorting money from small businesses and residents.

Court chief Klot Pich could not be reached for comment Wednesday, but he has denied the allegations in the past.

Judges who are found guilty of wrongdoing will ultimately answer to the Supreme Council of Magistracy, but such prosecutions are rare, said Ou Virak, president of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights.

“So far, if there are many complaints, or protests, from people, the actions taken are just surface punishments,” he said, “just pulling out of one place to fill up another.”

Senate Commission Examines Court System [-The thieves are asked to investigate their robbery case?]

A senator said Thursday his commission had not identified the root of the court system's problems.

By Kong Sothanarith, VOA Khmer
Original report from Phnom Penh
20 November 2008

Click here to listen to the Khmer audio program

The Senate's legislation and law commission is undertaking an examination of laws and irregularities inside Cambodia's courts, said Ouk Bunchhoeun, head of the commission.

"We just started the survey since the first semester, in Kampong Speu [provincial] court," he said. "We found some irregularities, like verdicts that must be applied to a person though the person refuses to have them applied, and the problem of over-extended provisional detention."

Cambodia's courts are widely accused of bias and corruption, something Ouk Bunchhoeun acknowledged the commission had found.

"But it seems difficult to evaluate clearly the origin of the problem," he said.

The examination will continue throughout Cambodia's 24 provinces and municipalities. The Senate commission is now examining the courts in Kandal province. Next on the block: the provinces of Prey Veng, Svay Rieng and Kampong Cham.

The commission is not only surveying the courts but is questioning local organizations that work with them, Ouk Bunchhoeun said.

Chan Saveth, a senior investigator for the rights group Adhoc, said Thursday that in reality, poor defendants saw swift action from the courts, unlike the rich or powerful.


"If the case is related to politics, the suspect is not easy to catch and the court delays action," he said. "And usually the poor say they lose justice because they have no money to pay the corrupt. Plus, we can note that the court is under the pressure of politics and powerful people."

Among other overhauls, donors have requested a reform of the judiciary.


According to a recent Center for Social Development survey, between April 1 and June 30 this year, 322 defendants failed to show in 137 trials. Of these, 6 percent were in detention but were not brought to court. The other 94 percent were not detained; they were either released or never arrested.

USAID in 2007 began hanging information boards inside court compounds to help the public understand transparently set fines for different crimes.

Ouk Bunchhoeun said the commission's work was ongoing, but at the end of it the Senate planned to write a report with recommendations that will be sent to relevant institutions like the Ministry of Justice.

Justice Minister Ang Vong Vattana said Thursday the commission's work "will help us reform in the future."

Donors must demand reforms before pledging funds

KILLING FIELD TRIALS

Monday March 03, 2008
SARA COLM
Human Rights Watch
Posted by the Bangkok Post

"But can the ECCC be credible if it only tries a pre-selected handful of individuals?"

The long-delayed trials of the leaders of the Khmer Rouge began dramatically last week with a judicial ''re-enactment'' at the regime's notorious Tuol Sleng prison, where more than 14,000 people were tortured and executed from 1975-79.

Part courtroom, part spectacle, the three remaining prison survivors were brought face-to-face with Kaing Gech Eav (Duch), the former prison chief, as he led international and Cambodian judges, prosecutors, lawyers and a coterie of court photographers on a tour of the prison.

Officially called the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), the Khmer Rouge Tribunal is a ''hybrid'' court, consisting of a majority of Cambodian judges sitting alongside international judges, with international and Cambodian co-prosecutors.

Duch is among five former Khmer Rouge leaders jailed on charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes for the deaths of as many as two million Cambodians during their four-year rule, which ended in 1979.

Last December, Duch made his first public appearance before the tribunal to appeal for release from pre-trial detention. His hearing stands in contrast to most judicial proceedings in Cambodia. Often the accused do not have access to a lawyer. If they do, they often will not have met the lawyer before going into court.

During trials, judges have been known to arbitrarily refuse to admit defence evidence and issue verdicts written in advance of the court hearing. In politically sensitive cases, judges receive ''guidance'' and instructions from senior political and government figures.

For most Cambodians, a courthouse is not a place to seek justice. Whether in criminal or civil proceedings, the rich and the powerful almost always come out on top. When a wealthy and well-connected complainant's case comes before a court, judges routinely ''bid'' on which one will be the lucky one to get the case _ and the financial rewards. Many Cambodians' experience of ''justice'' is finding the appropriate clerk to pay off in hopes that the judge will decide in one's favour. If you don't have money, you don't win.

It is in this environment that Cambodia's Khmer Rouge trials are taking place. The five arrests, high-profile hearings and investigations have given hope to some that the long-stalled process of bringing the Khmer Rouge to justice may finally yield results. But as international donor countries consider a request for an additional US$170 million (5.2 billion baht) in the coming weeks, they should be cautious and insist upon significant reforms before pledging more.

The ECCC was established as a special chamber within the Cambodian court system to try ''senior leaders'' and ''those most responsible'' for crimes committed by the Khmer Rouge from 1975-79. The UN initially opposed the hybrid arrangement, fearing that the Cambodian government would try to manipulate the tribunal and limit its independence. Cambodia's judiciary is widely known for its lack of independence, rampant corruption, and low professional standards. These problems remain, making it critical that all other parts of the ECCC function properly for there to be any chance that the process will be credible.

Chief among the issues that have yet to be resolved is just how far the ECCC will be willing to go in following the evidence and identifying additional individuals to investigate and prosecute. The Cambodian government would like as few prosecutions as possible in order to claim that it did its part in holding the Khmer Rouge accountable without implicating current figures in the Cambodian government, some of whom are former Khmer Rouge members.

But can the ECCC be credible if it only tries a pre-selected handful of individuals? ECCC budget projections presented to the donors in January indicate that at most three more individuals may be prosecuted.

While the five charged so far are key figures, large numbers of other alleged perpetrators _ including former Khmer Rouge government officials, senior military officials and regional authorities continue to live freely. Donors must ensure that the ECCC has the financial support and independence necessary to bring additional accused to justice.

Other issues facing the ECCC include the need for proper witness and victim protection programmes, without which it will be hard to conduct prosecutions or allow victims to safely participate as civil parties. Questions have already been raised as to how the ECCC can protect the witnesses who participated in last week's on-site investigations when the ECCC's witness unit is barely functioning.

Funds are also needed to hire sufficient investigators to carry out thorough and professional investigations; and a serious public outreach campaign to allow average Cambodians access and understand the process. Steps must also be taken to address serious allegations of corruption, kickbacks and mismanagement on the Cambodian side of the tribunal.

Rights observers have already questioned the legitimacy of some of the decisions that have been reached by the ECCC and the independence and commitment of some of the judges.

In February, for example, the ECCC overturned a motion for one of the Cambodian judges, Ney Thol, to be disqualified. As president of the military court, Ney Thol has presided over several show trials of Prime Minister Hun Sen's political opponents, with little regard for due process, the right to fair trial or even the jurisdiction of the court.

All of this makes the need for reforms within the ECCC urgent. Before contributing more funds, donors must demand greater accountability and a timetable for implementation of concrete reforms to effectively address the corruption allegations and rectify serious deficiencies in the court's management and administrative leadership.

The court also needs to be more transparent, so that justice is not only done, but seen to be done by Cambodians.

An essential first step is for the UN to promptly appoint a high-level adviser to the ECCC, with the diplomatic clout and competence to implement these critically needed changes. International assistance must aim to ensure that Cambodia's national practices rise to international standards, instead of lowering international standards to meet domestic practices such that they taint the UN's name and compromise international justice.

Only if donors and the UN insist on all possible safeguards, will it be possible for the Khmer Rouge tribunal to deliver to Cambodians the justice for which they have long been waiting.

Sara Colm is a senior researcher on Cambodia for Human Rights Watch.

Rights groups urge Cambodian leaders to meet UN envoy

UN special representative of the Secretary General for Human Rights in Cambodia Yash Ghai

PHNOM PENH (AFP) — Five international human rights groups Tuesday urged the Cambodian government to meet with a UN special envoy and to stop denying the problems facing the country.

Prime Minister Hun Sen said last week he would never see UN human rights envoy Yash Ghai, following his scathing appraisal of the nation's judicial system.

Hun Sen called Yash Ghai, a Kenyan lawyer, "a long-term tourist" and said "every time he comes, he always causes trouble."

In a statement, five top rights groups called on Cambodia to engage with Ghai to resolve critical issues, including improving the judicial system and ending the nation's land grabs.

"Rather than publicly rebuking the UN, the Cambodian government should meet with Yash Ghai and start seriously working on the recommendations included in his report," said Basil Fernando, executive director of the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission.

"There's no denying the facts. Expropriation of the land of Cambodia's poor is reaching a disastrous level, the courts are politicized and corrupt, and impunity for human rights violators remains the norm," Fernando said in a joint statement.

Human Rights Watch, the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, the International Federation for Human Rights, and the World Organisation against Torture also signed onto the statement.

Ghai ended a 10-day visit last week without obtaining a single meeting with any Cambodian officials.

Before leaving, Ghai said that Cambodia's judiciary has failed to provide justice, leaving the population in fear of going to court.

Ghai has repeatedly clashed with Cambodian leaders in the past due to his unusually blunt assessments of Cambodia's reform failures.

Hun Sen has never met Ghai, who was appointed as the UN rights envoy in November 2005.

The premier has called Ghai "stupid," "rude" and a "god without virtue."

Ly Vuoch Leng to face charges

Thursday, August 16, 2007
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Socheata

Ly Vuoch Leng, president of the Appeals Court who was recently relieved from her position, could face charges for accepting a $30,000 bribe in exchange for the release of the boss of the Chhay Hour II hotel, should the court find him to be at fault as the Ministry of Interior police had considered in his case. The Rasmei Kampuchea newspaper reported that after the bribery case was revealed, numerous sources are following this case very closely because, according to the law, if there is somebody paying the bribe, then there must be someone accepting the bribe also, and if there were to be no bribery, Chhun Poch (father of the Chhay Hour II owner) would not be sent to jail for bribing Ly Vuoch Leng. If Ly Vuoch Leng is indeed charged, she could face 3 to 7 years of jail sentence for accepting briberies, based on Article 38 of the UNTAC-era criminal law.

Cambodian Appeal Court's head removed for bribe scandal

August 12, 2007

President of the Cambodian Appeal Court has been removed in accordance with a royal decree issued on Thursday due to her intention to receive bribe, according to local media on Sunday.

King Norodom Sihamoni signed the decree to remove Ly Vouch Leng, according to requests from Prime Minister Hun Sen and Minister of Justice Ang Vong Vattana, said Cambodian-language newspaper the Kampuchea Thmey.

The removal arose from her involvement in a bribe case, unofficial source told the newspaper.

Ly Vouch Leng had expected to get 30,000 U.S. dollars of the 120,000 U.S. dollars of bribe money pledged for the release of two men, who were sentenced by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court over running pornographic business at Hotel Chhay Hour in Phnom Penh, the source said.

She managed to help release Te Pou Ly and Sam Leng, who were later arrested again over irregularity of the case.

Ly Vouch Leng was replaced by You Bun Leng, co-investigating judge of the Extraordinary Chamber in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) , and she will get a new position at Ministry of Justice.

Meanwhile, police detained Chhon Pouch on Thursday, who had attempted to bribe the officials in deputy of Te Pou Ly and Sam Leng. The Phnom Penh Municipal Court will conduct more investigation of the case.

Source: Xinhua