Strikers move protest to Phnom Penh

Garment workers from factories owned by Tai Yang Enterprise Co participate in a strike yesterday in Kandal province’s Ang Snuol district. Photograph: Vireak Mai/Phnom Penh Post

Tuesday, 10 July 2012
Mom Kunthear
The Phnom Penh Post

Thousands of workers from Tai Yang Enterprise, a supplier for major brands including Levis and the Gap, will move their nearly three-week-old strike from their factory in Kandal province’s Ang Snuol district to Freedom Park in Phnom Penh tomorrow in order to bring their petition to Prime Minister Hun Sen.

Rong Chhun, president of the Cambodian Confederation of Unions, said yesterday that the CCU and Cambodian Alliance Trade Unions sent a letter to Phnom Penh Municipal Hall to inform the governor about the workers’ gathering in the park, which was built for such protests.

“The number of the workers is still the same as the first day of striking, and they will keep striking until they can see results,” he said.

Rong Chhun said the roughly 4,000 workers also intend to get their petition to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton while she is in Phnom Penh for the ASEAN summit.

“We will do our best to help the workers and to take the petition to Hillary Clinton,” said Rong Chhun, adding that the workers had not provoked any problems with authorities during their strike action and that it would be a safe and peaceful strike tomorrow.

Chea Vichea Documentary Banned at Freedom Park [-Hun Xen can't stomach the truth?]

Rong Chhun talking to the press (Photo: DAP-news)

Labor leader Chea Mony was turned away from Freedom Park on Wednesday, where he hoped to screen a documentary about his slain brother, "Who Killed Chea Vichea?" (Photo: by Heng Reaksmey)

 Heng Reaksmey, VOA Khmer
Phnom Penh Wednesday, 17 November 2010

“The banning of this film shows that the freedom of expression in Cambodia is less than zero.”

About 100 armed police prevented a group of demonstrators from showing a film at Phnom Penh's newly built park for protesters.

The Cambodian Cofederation of Unions had hoped to show “Who Killed Chea Vichea?,” which criticizes the handling of the murder case of a union leader, Chea Vichea.

A group of 20 protesters, including Chea Vichea's brother, Chea Mony, arrived at Freedom Park in Phnom Penh Wednesday, but they were turned away by police with electric batons and shields.

“The banning of this film shows that the freedom of expression in Cambodia is less than zero,” Chea Mony, who is himself a labor leader, said Wednesday.

He planned to make $10,000 in copies of the film for free distribution to the public, he said.

Chea Vichea, a widely popular labor leader, was shot to death in February 2004. His killers have never been arrested, and two men brought to court for the crime were widely considered innocent.

The film is an indictment of the handling of the case and has not been allowed a public screening in Cambodia.

Freedom Park was established by the city of Phnom Penh as the only legal site where protesters may gather.

Rong Chhun wants to show “Who Killed Chea Vichea” in the “Freedom-Muzzling” Park

Local authorities used force to remove the projection screen on 01 May 2010

08 Nov 2010
Everyday.com.kh
Translated from Khmer by Soch

Rong Chhun, President of the Cambodia Independent Teachers’ Association (CITA), said on Sunday that he wants to show the film “Who Killed Chea Vichea” at the Freedom Park which was recently inaugurated. He wants the people to know who killed Chea Vichea and he wants the government to investigate this case to uncover the killers and their group so that they may be brought to face justice because, up to now, these assassins have not been found yet. Rong Chhun said that he will inform the city hall on Wednesday. Pa Socheatvong, the CPP deputy governor, said that to show this film, it is necessary that there is a prior agreement from the ministry of Culture and Fine Arts first. He said that if the show is done without such agreement, then no authorization will be given and those involved in the showing will be responsible for it. It should be noted that the Phnom Penh city authority had prevented Rong Chhun from showing the movie once already on 01 May 2010.

Sacrava's Political Cartoon: Freedom Park

Cartoon by Sacrava (on the web at http://sacrava.blogspot.com)

"I will not applaud this freedom park because it is a signal that Cambodia is limiting... the people's freedom": Rong Chhun

Phnom Penh Governor Kep Chuktema (right) greets well-wishers as he arrives for the inauguration ceremony of Democracy Square in downtown Phnom Penh, Cambodia. -- PHOTO: AP

'Freedom Park' opens

Nov 4, 2010
AFP

PHNOM PENH - CAMBODIA unveiled its first designated protest site in the capital on Thursday, in the face of rights groups' fears that Democracy Square is designed to keep dissenters isolated and out of sight.

'We are furthering democracy in Cambodia,' Phnom Penh governor Kep Chuktema said at the opening ceremony of the site, which is nicknamed Freedom Park and modelled on international examples such as Speakers' Corner in London.

He appealed to would-be protesters to freely voice their concerns at the 60 by 200 metre open space near the US embassy and the capital's famed Wat Phnom temple, which historically marks the centre of the city.

But rights activists fear the new square will keep protesters off the streets and away from government offices and legislative buildings - traditionally the focus of rallies.

'I will not applaud this freedom park because it is a signal that Cambodia is limiting... the people's freedom,' said Rong Chhun, president of the Cambodian Confederation of Unions.

While protesters can still apply for a permit to demonstrate in other parts of the capital, Rong Chhun fears authorities would use the park as an excuse to withhold permission.

Protest park opens in capital of autocratic DICTATORIAL Cambodia

Thursday, November 04, 2010
By Sopheng Cheang (CP)

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — The Cambodian government, widely criticized for quashing dissent, opened a small park Thursday to accommodate demonstrators. But opponents said the park's isolated location would render any demonstration useless.

Officials say that Democracy Square, more commonly known as Freedom Park, would facilitate full security for protesters and prevent general public disorder. The park, once a public garden, has no special facilities except for 10 public toilets.

"The creation of this Democracy Square allows us to easily provide good security and public order but it is a site where people can express their opinions freely and legally," said Nhem Saran, chief of Phnom Penh's Transportation Office, at the official opening ceremony.

The 60-by-200 metre (200-by-650 foot) site is close to the U.S. Embassy and Wat Phnom, a Buddhist temple that marks the city's centre, but is not near any major government offices. Its isolated location makes it nearly useless as a place to voice dissent, opponents said.

Chea Muny, president of Free Trade Union of the Workers of the Kingdom of Cambodia, a prominent workers leader who has been active in staging demonstrations, says the creation of the park is aimed at muffling the voices of protest.

He said the protesters want to rally in front of the government institutions and other places where their demands can be heard by those in power.

The government of Prime Minister Hun Sen is democratically elected but tries to limit dissent, often through legal means such as lawsuits. Journalists, human rights activists, opposition lawmakers and other critics have been convicted or jailed for defaming Hun Sen and his allies.

Last year, Cambodia's Parliament approved a bill banning demonstrations by more than 200 people. The law also requires protesters to seek official permission five days ahead of a planned rally. Lawmakers from the country's main opposition party, the Sam Rainsy Party, have described the law as a clear setback for Cambodia's democracy.

Cambodia's [Muzzled] 'Freedom Park' worries rights groups

(Photo: Wikimedia)

Thursday, September 30, 2010
By Suy Se (AFP)

PHNOM PENH — It has been billed as Cambodia's version of Speakers' Corner in London, but rights groups fear Phnom Penh's new Democracy Square is designed to keep protesters isolated and out of sight.

Workers are putting the final touches to a 60 by 200 metre (yard), tree-lined open space near the US embassy and the Cambodian capital's famed Wat Phnom temple, which historically marks the centre of the city.

Nicknamed Freedom Park and set to open shortly, it will serve as a designated area for people to air their grievances, not unlike Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park or its equivalent in Singapore.

But rights activists say the move is an attempt to keep protesters off the streets and away from government offices and legislative buildings, which are traditionally the focus of rallies and occasional scuffles with the police.

"Unfortunately, it is far away from the institutions where the decisions are made," said Ou Virak, president of the Cambodian Centre for Human Rights, adding that he would have preferred a site near the National Assembly.

While would-be protesters can still apply for permission to stage a demonstration in other parts of the capital, critics expect the government will use Democracy Square as an excuse not to grant such permission.

"When the park opens, the protesters will lose the freedom to protest in front of key institutions," Rong Chhun, president of the Cambodian Confederation of Unions, told AFP.

"They will be threatened and forced to rally at Freedom Park."

Yim Sovann, an outspoken member of parliament from the main opposition Sam Rainsy Party, echoed those concerns.

"It will not be a Freedom Park, but a park to deprive the people of freedom and rights," he said.

He added that the square, an open, unshaded space in a city where temperatures regularly top 30 degrees Celsius (86 degrees Fahrenheit), is too small to accommodate a sizeable crowd.

"We will not stand under the hot sun in such a small place. We will ask for a permit to march through the streets if necessary," he told AFP.

But Phnom Penh's police chief Touch Naruth warned that no more street protests would be allowed because they interrupt the flow of traffic.

He added that police would "crack down" on any unauthorised rallies outside government buildings or Prime Minister Hun Sen's home, another popular protest site.

Last month villagers from Battambang province protesting outside the premier's home about land grabbing were "quite aggressively dragged onto buses" and driven out of town, said Mathieu Pellerin of local rights group Licadho.

And in August 2009, again outside the premier's house, a number of opposition supporters were injured after clashing with police who were seen grabbing, punching and kicking protesters.

Cambodia's government has repeatedly been accused of trying to stifle free speech in the last year.

Last October, it passed a much-criticised law requiring protesters to seek official permission five days ahead of a planned rally and limiting the size of demonstrations in public spaces to 200 people.

Authorities also reserve the right to ban protests on safety grounds.

In a report released earlier this month, Licadho accused the government of continuing to "pursue repressive tactics, terrorising human rights defenders and undermining their ability to defend peacefully the rights of others."

"Now, we see that when rights defenders speak too much, they could end up in jail," the group's president Kek Galabru told AFP.

"Freedom of expression is facing challenges -- it's going down," she said.

But government officials insisted the human rights situation in the country was improving and the park was a good idea, modelled on foreign examples.

"Any country has this kind of place. People can protest and say whatever they want in this place," said government spokesman Khieu Kanharith.

Phnom Penh's Democracy Square will not be Cambodia's only version of Speakers' Corner, as the law calls for similar sites to open in provinces across the country, much to the dismay of activists.

Cambodia builds small, distant Freedom Park, criticized as place 'where no one will be heard' [-The Freedom to Muffle Protesters' Voices Park?]

Thursday, August 26, 2010
By Sopheng Cheang (CP)

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — Cambodia is building a small park to accommodate demonstrators, but would-be protesters criticize the project as a means to throttle dissent by keeping them far from government offices.

Democracy Square is 70 per cent complete and should be finished by the end of September, said Sam Samuth, chief of Phnom Penh's Municipal garden bureau, on Thursday.

The 60-by-200 metre (200-by-650 foot) site is very close to the U.S. Embassy and Wat Phnom, a famous old Buddhist temple that historically marks the city's centre but is not near any major government offices, such as the seat of government and the National Assembly.

It is about a mile (1.6 kilometres) north of a park across from the old parliament building that has been the most popular venue for political and social protests, some of which authorities ended with force.

Rong Chhun, president of the Cambodian Confederation of Unions, who has been active in staging demonstrations, says the purpose of the site — also known as Freedom Park — is to muffle protesters' voices.

"I think the location of the Freedom Park is not the right place for demonstrators to show their concern. I — and other protesters — would not stage a demonstration at a place where no one will be heard," Rong Chhun said.

The park, built where the headquarters of the military police used to be, will have no special facilities except for eight public toilets.

The government of Prime Minister Hun Sen is democratically elected but tries to limit dissent, often through legal means such as lawsuits. Journalists, human rights activists, opposition lawmakers and other critics have been convicted or jailed for defaming Hun Sen and his allies.

In October 2009, Cambodia's parliament approved a bill banning demonstrations by more than 200 people. The law also requires protesters to seek official permission five days ahead of a planned rally.

During the debate, lawmakers from the country's main opposition party, the Sam Rainsy Party, described the law as a clear setback for Cambodia's democracy.

Tuol Sleng: Hill of the Poisonous Trees

Tuol Sleng (Photo: Tristan Clements)

Monday, May 10, 2010
Op-Ed by MP

There is a habit in most autocratic rules to invert conventional idioms and languages by hijacking their customary meanings and replacing those meanings with their exact opposite. Thus, we have ‘Democratic Kampuchea’, ‘People’s Republic of Kampuchea’, ‘State of Cambodia’ as well as ‘the Cambodian People’s Party’ just as we have ‘Security 21’ (S21 or Tuol Sleng), ‘Stupa’ of Choeung Ek, and now the excitingly named ‘Freedom Park’.

FROM a distance the Museum of Tuol Sleng looks much like most rundown building compounds in Phnom Penh. A former high school, the building was chosen by the Khmer Rouge to function as their foremost national security centre which they renamed S21 or Security 21 in 1975. It appeared where most prisons – referred to by the regime as ‘re-education centres’ – were spread throughout the country’s rural regions where virtually all of Cambodians were made to reside, Tuol Sleng was chosen for its physical proximity to the KR leadership as a soundboard for political activities being waged inside the regime in general, but more specifically, it provided the Pol Pot faction with a microcosm of what was at stake within the ranks of even this exclusive, tight band of close associates who had been together in one way or another since the 1950s. Among the thousands of victims who passed through the centre were also prominent figures and intellectuals such as Hu Nim who might have posed leadership contention threat to Pol Pot himself. Although, Pol Pot did lead a faction that decisively broke clear of the guidance and shadow of Hanoi and many commentators have since made references to ‘the Pol Pot faction’ as such, in reality, the man himself remained aloof and distrustful of most of his political colleagues and therefore the ascribed faction might well be – strictly speaking – misplaced.

There is something of a fateful coincidence that this aptly named location – Hill of the Poisonous Trees - was chosen as an incarceration site in the capital city otherwise emptied of its former inhabitants of 2 million plus. Yet there was certainly an irony in the fact that the leadership forcefully evacuated the city’s residents fearing espionage and enemies of the Revolution could be fermented and sheltered among the population, nevertheless, ensured that it had direct, personal command over its most feared dissidents by maintaining such an establishment in its own backyard. It was as if Pol Pot, himself used to a life of an incognito, could only feel ill at ease among the masses which had provided him what he most sought for his own personal security and protection: shelter and anonymity, yet at the same time dreading the same advantages that conceivably could be extended to his enemies, now that the table has been turned and he transformed from one of persecuted to Persecutor in Chief of the nation.

From this dialectic and pattern of thought beset by paranoia and fear that have underpinned Cambodian politics in the last 50 years; a perennial living condition that continues to shape present and foreseeable future political life, one discerns clear running parallels at work within the current leadership and its behavioural structure in terms of so-called national security decisions, notwithstanding its apparent relative openness and political inclusion. Where national leaders put in office through popular ballot in most genuine democracies have had to take up minimum precautions and means to protect their selves from possible assassination attempts or terrorist attacks, none to my knowledge has restricted public demonstrations to one confined single location, curiously named ‘Freedom Park’.

If the creation of the park is meant as a precursor of further reforms to come rather than a substitute for the citizens to bring their legitimate grievances to the notice of the government of the day by their preferred routes that could include marching in front of governing institutions like the National Assembly or the official residence of the PM, then it would be in line with democratic developments worldwide and accepted as within genuine national security and interest.

Many have pointed to the destabilising impact that on-going demonstrations in Thailand have exerted upon Thai society and well-being as an example to be avoided, but instances of violence apart, public protests and riots are the identifiable symptoms or indicators of a society in transition towards something far more substantive and wholesome than what it has hitherto been allowed to taste and enjoy: democratic freedom. In the 19th century the emergence of ‘Speakers’ Corners’ in a number of public parks and venues in England was also marked by public riots which led some observers to describe the event as the beginning of the English revolution, but if these observers were anticipating violence and bloodshed on the scale of the French Revolution, they would have been deeply disappointed.

There is a habit in most autocratic rules to invert conventional idioms and languages by hijacking their customary meanings and replacing those meanings with their exact opposite. Thus, we have ‘Democratic Kampuchea’, ‘People’s Republic of Kampuchea’, ‘State of Cambodia’ as well as ‘the Cambodian People’s Party’ just as we have ‘Security 21’ (S21 or Tuol Sleng), ‘Stupa’ of Choeung Ek, and now the excitingly named ‘Freedom Park’.

It is not comforting for individuals sympathetic to the current regime who otherwise feel they are nationalists or patriots, trying to do their bid to help the country advance socially to read this. However, overall reality presents them with a world far removed from their carefully inculcated dreams and indoctrinated visions. The country we know and love, the people and their smiles as well as their sorrows and tears are all real enough. But on the other hand, to suggest that the country is in their possession, that they have mastery over its destiny and fate, that the Party represents them nationally, that the Stupa is there to commemorate and honour the dead in the way traditional Khmer stupas do rather than exploiting their memory for political propaganda purposes, that Freedom Park denotes anything other than straight jacketing public expression of any kind deemed inimical to the stability of the regime, to assume all this is tantamount to taking a leap in imagination into the realm of pure make-belief.

This is far from implying that tyrants and autocrats lack conviction or belief in their own slogans - far from it. Belief can lead to conviction which could in turn harden into intolerance when confronted with contradiction or opposition where such a belief is held within, or derived from, narrow confines of temporal personal circumstances in combination with deep-seated insecurity and fear.

Take the issue being raised (legitimately, in my view) about the possibility of graffiti being applied inside the museum of Tuol Sleng itself. The man who brought his art to the museum is either being condemned for defacing this monument to human suffering or condoned for dramatising that tragedy by magnifying expressions of the dead on the walls of this former prison. The artist himself could have chosen a less sensitive place for showcasing his art, but whatever his motives, he would have found it exceedingly difficult - if not impossible - to do the same in other countries with a similiar past. Indeed everyone could have their piece of Cambodia if they are willing to go by the rules – Indian archaeologists and experts ruined most of the bas relief work at Angkor Wat with their acid like chemical substance that they used to ‘clean’ up the surface of the delicately carved gallery walls (why could not experiment be carried out on sample sandstones prior to the wholesale application of the chemical on the gallery proper itself?). After all, the artist worked in full view of the authority and therefore the weight of judgement (if graffiti has indeed resulted from his work) or censure falls heaviest upon the local authority that has allowed narrow political self-interest or manipulation to override considerations of national sentiment and collective values.

Cambodia stands today - three decades after the fall of the Pol Pot regime - like the Hill of the Poisonous Trees that is Tuol Sleng, a shattered, haunted society in desperate need of healing, but has instead found only the known certainty of its ill-fated past through tortured memory like the curse of the museum’s ill-fated name itself.

MP

Sacrava's Political Cartoon: Inside the Freedom Park

Cartoon by Sacrava (on the web at http://sacrava.blogspot.com)

Click on the cartoon to zoom in

Cambodia: Freedom of Assembly in Freedom Park

9 May 2010
Written by Mong Palatino Global Voices Online

Good news: Cambodians can now organize a protest action against the government without a fear of being violently dispersed by the police.

Bad news: Protests are only allowed in the newly established Freedom Park. And protesters need a permit to use the Freedom Park.

The Freedom Park is located far from government buildings and the parliament. Assemblies that number more than 200 are allowed if the organizers are able to secure a permit. The Freedom Park can accommodate about 5,000 people. The government has announced that protests in other areas will be outlawed.

Cambodia's Freedom Park. Political cartoon by Sacravatoons

Some bloggers have described the Freedom Park as “Round-up Park” or “Deprived Freedom Park.” The Son of the Khmer Empire reacts:

In my point of view this so-called freedom park is usless and it will be constitutionally used as a suppressing instrument for Hun Xen (Prime Minister of Cambodia) government to successfully deprive the freedom of the assembly of the people of Cambodia if the Demonstration Law is not amended.

The blogger is referring to the Demonstration Law which was passed last June 2009 which critics cited as a repressive legal measure. The law allows protests to take place only between 6am to 6pm in a designated freedom park.

But some commenters are happy with the establishment of a Freedom Park. Here is an anonymous commenter:

These so-called critics sound more like cynics to me. The fact that the city hall decides to set up a proper place for demonstration and voicing concern and you call this silencing? What do these people want?

Before, they said they are oppressed to cast any voice, now they are given a platform, they call it silencing

…not to mention chaotic demonstration can block traffic make traffic jam, etc… good for authority to designate an area by law

Sacrava's Political Cartoon: Freedom [to remain silent?] Park

Cartoon by Sacrava (on the web at http://sacrava.blogspot.com)

Cambodia has 'Freedom park'

May 6, 2010
Reuters

PHNOM PENH - CAMBODIA has set up a 'Freedom Park' designated for political demonstrations in a move critics say is another attempt to protect the government and silence dissenting voices.

The site, which is located far from government buildings and parliament, will be the only space made available to any group wanting to stage a demonstration. Protests at other locations in the capital Phnom Penh will be outlawed.

'This is the place to express opinions,' said the city's police chief, Touch Naruth. 'I toured the site this morning. This is a public place where up to 5,000 people can gather,' he said, noting that the law only allows a maximum of 200 people to protest and larger gatherings required written permission from the authorities.

That law was passed in October last year, sparking condemnation from rights groups and opposition lawmakers, who accused the ruling Cambodian People's Party of abusing its parliamentary majority to curtail freedom of expression.

Cambodia's defamation laws were also tightened last year after a series of court cases brought against lawmakers and journalists critical of long-serving Prime Minister Hun Sen and his powerful associates.

The idea for the 'Freedom Park' appears to follow that of Singapore, where protests were made legal in 2008, but only in a designated 'Speakers' Corner'. The Singaporean idea is modelled on a similar place in London's Hyde Park, although Britain's laws do not restrict demonstrations to a single location.

Critics decry demonstration law

Police question protestors from Phnom Penh’s Boeung Kak community at a demonstration last year. (Photo by: HENG CHIVOAN)

Thursday, 18 June 2009
Written by Vong Sokheng
The Phnom Penh Post

"Broadcast and print media, and public forums can exercise their freedom of expression - demonstrations, too. The organisers just need permission." - Phay Siphan, Hun Sen's parrot

The draft legislation, which could be approved next week, will limit freedom of expression, they say

A DRAFT law regulating peaceful demonstrations that opposition lawmakers and civil society groups say will infringe on people's freedom of expression could be adopted as early as next week, according to Sam Rainsy Party lawmaker Son Chhay.

The draft law would require demonstrations to take place between 6am and 6pm, and to be held in a designated zone or so-called "freedom park" if they have over 200 participants.

In addition, the law would make the organisers of demonstrations responsible for any damage of violence done by participants, Son Chhay said.

The president of the Cambodian Centre for Human Rights, Ou Virak, added that the draft law goes against the spirit of the Cambodia's Constitution and will heighten political repression and control.

"That version of the new law on demonstrations will allow the government to take legal action to control every demonstration and restrict the freedom of expression in order to keep the hot issue of land grabbing silent," he said.

"If people have the freedom to express their opinion about land grabbing it will bring trouble to the government," he added.

Rong Chhun, the president of the Cambodian Confederation of Unions, which was prevented from staging a demonstration during the visit of Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, said that new law would move Cambodia closer to a single-party dictatorship.

"If the draft law is not revised, we will lose our freedom of expression," he said.

But Council of Ministers spokesman Phay Siphan said that the government has never restricted freedom of expression so long as it does not affect national security, safety and public order.

"Freedom of expression is not as wonderful as in the United States, but it is acceptable for this society," he said. "Broadcast and print media, and public forums can exercise their freedom of expression - demonstrations, too. The organisers just need permission."