Showing posts with label Judicial reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judicial reform. Show all posts

Saturday, February 19, 2011

UN Rep Investigates Land Dispute

Surya Subedi talks with Hun Sen (L) in Phnom Penh, Jan 19, 2010. (AFP)
2011-02-18
Radio Free Asia

A UN official visits the site of a land dispute as part of his inquiry into human rights in Cambodia.

A United Nations human rights representative visited a Cambodian village community embroiled in a land dispute on Friday as part of a fact-finding mission for a set of wider reforms he is recommending to the country’s leadership.

The visit by Surya Subedi, the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Cambodia, came on the fourth day of a 10-day trip to the country, and followed a meeting with Prime Minister Hun Sen where he expressed concerns about the country’s court system and a new law on nongovernmental organizations.

Subedi told RFA that it is important to take the complaints of Cambodia’s rural population into consideration in addition to speaking with high-level officials while forming an overview of the country’s human rights situation.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

CCHR Welcomes Report by Special Rapporteur and Calls on Govt to Lead Judicial Reform

Click on the press release in Khmer to zoom in

PRESS RELEASE
Phnom Penh, 22 September 2010
For immediate release

CCHR WELCOMES REPORT BY SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR AND CALLS FOR GOVERNMENT TO LEAD JUDICIAL REFORM

The Cambodian Center for Human Rights (“CCHR”) welcomes the latest report from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, Surya Subedi (the “Special Rapporteur”). The Report, dated 16 September 2010, examines the effectiveness of the Cambodian judiciary in promoting and protecting human rights and will be presented to the Human Rights Council in Geneva on 28 September. CCHR calls on the Royal Government of Cambodia (“RGC”) to review the content and recommendations of the Report closely and avail itself of opportunities to work with the many willing partners who are available to help the RGC strengthen the judiciary and its capacity to protect the rights of the citizens of Cambodia.

CCHR notes with concern the dismissive comments of numerous government officials reported by media in response to the release of the Report of the Special Rapporteur. It is no secret that Cambodia’s judiciary faces challenges, many of which are complex and difficult to address. The RGC is clearly aware of this fact, having created the Council for Legal and Judicial Reform, which produced a Legal and Judicial Reform Strategy in 2003 setting out the RGC’s reform priorities. It should come as no surprise that Cambodian and international NGOs, opposition parties, donors, and United Nations treaty bodies and special mandates have repeatedly expressed similar recommendations in regard to strengthening the judiciary. CCHR encourages the RGC to view these groups as genuine partners in the challenging goal of legal and judicial reform and capacity building rather than dismissing their findings and recommendations as biased, uninformed and irrelevant.

Christophe Peschoux, country representative for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (“OHCHR”), has reportedly offered the assistance of his office to the RGC to help implement the recommendations in the report of the Special Rapporteur. Cambodian NGOs such as CCHR operate trial monitoring projects that collect data to support the RGC’s legal and judicial reform efforts. Donors have offered their support and technical expertise to a model court project, and, as CCHR has repeatedly stressed, there are ongoing opportunities for the RGC to take advantage of the expertise and experience of judicial officers employed at the Khmer Rouge Tribunal. These examples provide evidence that, if the RGC is willing to genuinely engage with those who offer constructive criticism and present good faith recommendations for reform, there is no shortage of available support.

However, when considering legal and judicial reform, a distinction must be drawn between areas in which partners can provide support – such as collecting data through trial monitoring, providing technical expertise, and providing funding – and those in which the RGC must take the lead. The creation of key laws by the RGC such as the Law on the Status of Judges and Prosecutors and the Law on the Organization and Functioning of the Courts, as well as the reform of the Supreme Council of Magistracy, would necessarily result in greater independence for judges and prosecutors.

Similarly, by removing the crimes of defamation and disinformation and ending politically motivated criminal cases against members of opposition parties and those in the media, the RGC would clearly indicate that it has no interest in using the courts as a political tool to silence critics. There are multiple partners willing to support legal and judicial capacity building in Cambodia and the RGC has made some progress in this area. However, fundamental and transformative legal and judicial reform that allows the Cambodian judiciary to protect Cambodia’s liberal democracy and the rights of all citizens requires a willingness from the RGC to limit its own power.

For more information, please contact:

Ou Virak
President
Cambodian Center for Human Rights
Tel: +855 12 404 051
Email: ouvirak@cchrcambodia.org

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Mu Sochua Seeks Reform of Judiciary After Lawsuit

SRP MP Mu Sochua (Photo: Sovannara, RFI)

Men Kimseng, VOA Khmer
Washington, DC Wednesday, 25 August 2010

“This can only be done when the Sam Rainsy Party is elected and Mr. Sam Rainsy becomes prime minister.”
Outspoken opposition parliamentarian Mu Sochua, who lost a defamation case to Prime Minister Hun Sen that resulted in a salary deduction, has vowed to go after the courts to demand reform of the country’s judicial system.

“We, the opposition party together with all the people, demand a justice system that is truly independent and does not act as a political tool,” Mu Sochua said as a guest on “Hello VOA” Monday.

Mu Sochua lost her final appeal to the Supreme Court in June. Her salary will now be garnished to repay approximately $4,000 in court fines and compensation to Hun Sen, who countersued her when she brought defamation charges against him last year.

Mu Sochua appealed to Cambodians to rally behind the opposition Sam Rainsy Party to demand that judges renounce membership from the central committee of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party and to call for an active Supreme Council of Magistracy to oversee judges’ performance. She also called for sufficient lawyers to provide legal services to the people.

“This can only be done when the Sam Rainsy Party is elected and Mr. Sam Rainsy becomes prime minister,” she said. “We are determined to get this done.”

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Judicial Reform Not Moving Fast Enough: Experts

Seng Theary, president of the Center for Justice and Reconciliation. (Photo: Courtesy of Center for Justice and Reconciliation)

Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer
Washington, D.C Friday, 25 June 2010

“It is only now that we have time to think about restoring the courts, which began in 1993 when Untac and the international community entered.”
The justice system is plagued by a history of bad luck and the lack of current political will for reform, despite efforts to rebuild it since the arrival of the UN in the early 1990s, legal development experts told “Hello VOA” Thursday.

The legacy of the Khmer Rouge, which destroyed the courts, and former control by Vietnam both hampered the development of the system, said Seng Theary, president of the Center for Justice and Reconciliation.

“It is only now that we have time to think about restoring the courts, which began in 1993 when Untac and the international community entered,” she said.

Meanwhile, politics has divided the three branches of government, corruption has entered the training process for court officials and the courts are inadequately trained and equipped, she said.

Only about $2 million per year is spent on 26 different courts, including the Appeals and Supreme courts, she said.

Am Sam Ath, a rights investigator for Licadho, who also joined “Hello VOA” Thursday, said the courts lack independence, despite constitutional guarantees that theoretically separate power between the branches of government—executive, legislative and judicial.

“We have seen that there is interference from the executive branch in some ways, which leads to the issue of independence as still being a problem,” he said.

Trainee judges should be selected on merit and not be involved in political parties, he said, and should be taught to avoid corruption.

Tuesday, December 01, 2009

Govt readies for UN human rights review

Tuesday, 01 December 2009
Sebastian Strangio and Sam Rith
The Phnom Penh Post

The UPR is not the only event in Geneva − this is a continuing process.
Land evictions, judicial reform to feature high on the agenda during the three-day hearing.

JUDICIAL reform, corruption and land rights are expected to be high on the agenda when Cambodia comes before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva for its first formal rights review this afternoon.

A UN summary report compiling the recommendations filed by 23 local and international rights organisations in April flagged concerns including continuing legal impunity and increases in the “rate and scale of land-grabbing and forced evictions” that have plagued the country since 2004.

Surya Prasad Subedi, the UN’s special human rights rapporteur to Cambodia, said the three-day Universal Periodic Review hearing would give Cambodia “an opportunity ... to engage in a comprehensive manner” on rights issues with other member states.

Subedi also said he hoped the government would take the hearing seriously, after it was criticised at a similar review at the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Geneva in May for sending just a single delegate – UN ambassador Sun Suon – to the two-day hearing.

“It is a good opportunity for the government of Cambodia to defend its human rights record before an international human rights body. The more the government appears taking the matter seriously the more the government will receive credit for its endeavours in this regard,” he said by email.

New mechanism

The quadrennial review, established with the reform of the UN’s rights body in 2006, is the main mechanism by which each UN member state is scrutinised on human rights issues.

During a three-hour session today, the Cambodian delegation is expected to answer questions from the council, the result of which will shape an outcome report to be adopted on Thursday.

Om Yentieng, senior adviser to Prime Minister Hun Sen and head of the government-run Cambodian Committee of Human Rights, said on Monday that the government had sent three officials to Geneva, including its ambassador to the UN, to attend the UPR session.

“I do not expect anything from the meeting in Geneva because the situation in Cambodia is not the same as what is written in the human rights reports,” he said. “What we have seen is that Cambodia is getting more progressive from day to day.”

Thun Saray, president of the rights group Adhoc, said the review would not lead to an immediate improvement in the human rights situation, but appealed to the government to accept its recommendations and make a plan for joint NGO-government action to improve the rights situation.

“The UPR is not only the event in Geneva – this is a continuing process,” he said. “We would like to appeal to the government to take this issue seriously.”

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

Groups Caution Government on Judicial Reform

By Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer
Original report from Washington
06 October 2009


Civic groups and opposition officials say the government should not establish a working group to reform the Supreme Council of Magistracy but should instead seek oversight from outside, as officials look to reform the judiciary.

A revamped judiciary is a high priority for many donors, but critics worry the constitution and the balance of powers are not being maintained.

Prime Minister Hun Sen formed the “Assistant Group” in September, to look into Council reform, but 10 of the group members are from the judiciary, and one is from the Ministry of Justice.

The group should “comply with the principal of our constitution, where exist three split branches, executive, legislative and the court,” said Ou Virak, head of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights. “If this legally goes through the National Assembly, I think that’s good and I welcome it.”

A subdecree, suggested by Council Minister Sok San and Dith Monty, chief of the Supreme Court and co-chairman of the Council for Legal and Judicial Reform, aims to aid the functioning of the Disciplinary Council of the Supreme Council, the only body with the authority to investigate disciplinary measures against judges and prosecutors.

The Assistant Group has the power to receive and monitor complaints against jurists and to report to the Disciplinary Council, and to use law enforcement in its mission.

Prior to the group’s formation, Hun Sen had ordered on Sept. 4 the establishment of a joint ministerial committee with 26 members from the police and judiciary, proposed by the Ministry of Interior, to oversee the work of the courts. But this move met with strong opposition from lawmakers who said it was unconstitutional.

In a Sept. 19 report to Hun Sen, Interior Minister Sar Kheng defended the committee’s work, saying it was not overseeing the court but was focusing on criminal cases and other cases in a database, especially human trafficking and sexual exploitation.

Court and police officials have said the courts recently freed suspects that should have been held, including Chea Rotha, a former senior police official accused with accomplices in an acid attack.

“Freeing some of these individuals caused the government unhappiness,” Ou Virak said.

Lawyers who spoke on condition of anonymity said the working group looked better than the joint ministerial working group, but that government institutions already exist to reform the judiciary.

Cheam Yiep, a Cambodian People’s Party lawmaker, told VOA Khmer the 11-member committee would not interfere with the government, but was meant to assist the judicial body.

However, Sam Rainsy Party lawmaker Yim Sovann said the working group was unlikely to be effective and would not earn the confidence of the people and investors.

“I believe that because the present court is under the political influence of the ruling party, what they will do is just for looking good,” he said. “But if you want real effectiveness, it’s not difficult at all, as the recommendations from the international community and some developed countries…have been given already.”

Suy Mong Leang, secretary-general for the Council for Legal and Judicial Reform, rejected such criticism, saying the government moves would not affect the independence of the court but was meant to cooperate with government institutions.

The division of powers between three branches of government does not mean the executive branch can’t cooperate with the court, he said, as long as the executive does not interfere with the court’s work trying cases. Punishment would be up to the court, not the executive, he said.

Suon Sareth, executive secretary of the Cambodian Human Rights Action Committee, which comprises 21 prominent rights groups, said that in his view, the government wants to reform the judiciary, but it should only provide technical, legal and financial assistance for an independent institution.

“If we talk about the government policy in general, the government promotes the judicial field in Cambodia,” he said. “The government wants the judicial sector in Cambodia to proceed smoothly and well. This is what we see generally, in a positive sense.”

But the formation of an Assistant Group for the Disciplinary Council, he said, “I think that’s a bit excessive, and I see that it will affect the procession of the judicial field in Cambodia…a little bit in the negative sense, even though I understand that the government has a good willingness to help promote the judicial sector.”

A secretariat for the Supreme Council of Magistracy, which had a similar function for the judicial working group for the Assistant Group, was dissolved by the government several years ago. The government said the body had not functioned well and was a drain on the national budget.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Donors air next year’s aid agenda

Wednesday, 30 September 2009
Sebastian Strangio and Vong Sokheng
The Phnom Penh Post


LAND rights, judicial reform and the global economic crisis are to be among the key challenges for Cambodia in 2010, according to foreign donors, who have expressed cautious optimism about the government’s progress in key areas.

Speaking at the Government-Development Partner Coordination Committee (GDCC) meeting held in Phnom Penh on Tuesday, senior officials and diplomats discussed the country’s progress on the series of Joint Monitoring Indicators (JMIs) that are linked to annual donations of foreign aid.

“This meeting of the GDCC is taking place at a particularly critical juncture, as we are seeing more clearly the impacts from the global economic downturn and the slowdown in Cambodia’s economic growth,” World Bank Country Manager Qimiao Fan said in a statement released following the meeting.

German Ambassador Frank Markus Mann hailed “very positive results” in the land sector but said a spate of recent land disputes represented an “urgent” challenge to poverty reduction and equitable economic development.

Similarly, Australian Ambassador Margaret Adamson praised recent actions on judicial reform, including the government’s plan to send the long-awaited anticorruption law to the National Assembly “in the coming weeks”, but expressed concerns about the recent crackdown on government critics.

The meeting came ahead of December’s annual Cambodia Development Cooperation Forum, at which foreign nations are set to announce their aid donations for 2010, but critics have long questioned the utility of such meetings.

In a February report, international group Global Witness argued that despite promises of reform dating back to 2001, the government has failed to deliver, noting the continued lack of an anticorruption law.

Sam Rainsy Party spokesman Yim Sovann said donors, who pledged nearly US$1 billion in aid in 2009, had the power to pressure the government on key issues, but that past experience was not encouraging.

If they continue to do what they’ve done in past years, there will be no improvements,” he said.

Chith Sam Ath, executive director of the NGO Forum, who attended the meeting, said it was positive that the issues were being raised but that the government’s commitment would be tested in between the government-donor forums.

“There need to be further discussions between NGOs and development partners,” he said. “NGOs welcome” further discussions and dialogue.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Cambodia: Law On The Statute Of Judges, Not Their Retirement, Is The Right End From Which To Tackle Judicial Reform

Sunday, 9 August 2009
Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission

Cambodia: Law On The Statute Of Judges, Not Their Retirement, Is The Right End From Which To Tackle Judicial Reform

Last June the Cambodian government ignored the jurisdiction of the nomination and discipline of judges and prosecutors of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy (SCM) when it bypassed the court and got the King, who is chairman of this supreme judicial council, to retire and replace half of the eight SCM members. The retired members were Ouk Vithun, Prosecutor General of the Supreme Court, 62, an ex-officio member; Henrot Raken, 68, Prosecutor General of the Appeal Court, another ex-officio member; Khieu Sameth, 62, President of Kandal Provincial Court, an appointed member; and Sin Dim, 66, President of Preah Sihanouk Provincial Court, another appointed member.

The government’s infringement upon the SMC’s jurisdiction is unconstitutional as it violated the independence of the judiciary of which the SCM is an integral part. Apparently the government was not happy with the lack of the SMC’s swift disciplinary action against a provincial prosecutor whose alleged faults had been widely reported in the press.

Perhaps more importantly, the government was not happy with the SCM when the latter had not retired the judges and prosecutors it had proposed. The SCM had its own reasons for not heeding the government’s proposal. It wanted to uphold its independence and exercise its authority over the nomination and discipline of judges and prosecutors.

Even more importantly, there was no law on the statute of judges and prosecutors which should set the retirement age for them. The government has not yet enacted this long overdue law and also the law on the organization of the judiciary when the country‘s Constitution has specifically stipulated the need to enact both laws since 1993. Like the law on the statute of civil servants and the law on the statute of members of the armed forces, which have not been specifically stipulated in the Constitution and which had both been enacted in the mid-1990s, this law on the statute of judges and prosecutors would determine, among other things, the age of retirement for judges and prosecutors. Without this law, the SCM would have no legal basis to retire judges and prosecutors.

The SCM did not comply with a government decree (not a law) which has been echoed by subsequent government circular letters and which fixes the retirement age of 60 for judges and prosecutors when this decree was based on no law on the statute of judges and prosecutors. This inaction has led the government to accuse the SCM of defending certain members of the judiciary who have wished to remain in active service.

Now with a new composition more amenable to the government’s wishes, the SCM sets out to retire some 27 elder judges and prosecutors, retirement which some have seen as part of the long overdue judicial reform.

However, the retirement of the four members of the SCM in June and the planned retirement of a big batch of judges and prosecutors are but palliatives to defuse mounting pressure for judicial reform. These measures have tackled this reform at the wrong end and have in no way come to address the real issue of the legal foundation of Cambodia’s entire judiciary. They have further violated the constitutional principle of the separation of powers, judicial independence and consolidated the executive control of the judiciary.

If the government is not happy with the functioning of the SCM, the Prime Minister should raise the issue with the King who is its chairman when he has an audience with him twice a month (Art.20 of the Constitution). The government should not delay any further the enactment of the law on the statute of judges and prosecutors and the law on the organization of the judiciary so that judges and prosecutors, who belong to the same body of magistrates, would have proper legal status, which they don’t have at the moment, and all courts of law would be duly established by law, which they are not at the moment. Everyone would thus be entitled to be tried by an independent, competent and impartial tribunal established by law, a right which is specifically stipulated under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Cambodia is a party.

The government cannot apply the law on the nomination of judges and on the functioning of courts of law enacted in the communist days, prior to the promulgation of the current Constitution, and any decree enacted thereof when they are not among the “Laws and standard documents in Cambodia that safeguard State properties, rights, freedom and legal private properties and in conformity with the national interests, (which) shall continue to be effective until altered or abrogated by new texts” under the transitional article 158 of the current Constitution.

The absence of the law on the statute of judges and prosecutors poses a big problem of legitimacy for the composition of the SCM itself whose three judge members should be elected by their peers, an election which has been held up for 16 years, which is too long. The lack of the legitimacy of the composition of the SCM in turn questions the legitimacy of the composition of the country’s Constitutional Council which is a sort of a constitutional court, whose three members are appointed by the SCM.

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) urges the Cambodian government to prioritise the building of the legal foundation and framework of the country’s entire judiciary, its organization and the status of judges and prosecutors by enacting the law on their statute, including their retirement age, in tandem with the law on the organisation of the judiciary, two of the important laws that are specifically stipulated in the country’s constitution. This is the right end from which it should tackle judicial reform in Cambodia.

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.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Judges' retirement will not bring any reform the CPP-biased judicial system

Council To Consider Judicial Retirements

By Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer
Original report from Washington
27 July 2009


Cambodia is poised to taken an unprecedented step in judicial reform, with the Ministry of Justice suggesting 43 court officials older than 60 years old be retired, VOA Khmer has learned.

Ang Vong Watana, the Minister of Justice, suggested in a May letter to Prime Minister Hun Sen that the officials be replaced in order to “strengthen good governance, participate in reform of the judicial sector…as well as give opportunities to a new generation of judges and prosecutors.”

The Supreme Council of Magistracy would decide on the retirements, the minister said in his May 27 letter, recently obtained by VOA Khmer, but he asked for Hun Sen “to decide in principle” whether judges aged 60 and above could be considered for retirement.

Within two days, Hun Sen had sent back a hand-written note in the bottom of the letter saying he agreed in principle.

The letter with Hun Sen’s comments, including a list of potential retirees, was copied to Council Minister Sok An, a deputy prime minister who is the head of the Council for Legal and Judicial Reform.

The next meeting of the Supreme Council of Magistracy is set for Wednesday, when the retirements will be debated.

The nine-member Council is presided over by King Norodom Sihamoni and is comprised of eight other members from different courts, all of whom are members of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party.

The 43 officials include judges, prosecutors, deputy prosecutors, court chiefs and their deputies. Four of them are members of the Supreme Council of Magistracy itself.

Only four of the officials’ names have been made public in recent days.

Ouk Vithun, prosecutor-general of the Supreme Court, would be replaced by Chea Leang, who is currently the Cambodian prosecutor for the Khmer Rouge tribunal. Hang Roraken, prosecutor-general of the Appeals Court, would be replaced by Ouk Savuth, deputy prosecutor-general of the Appeals Court. Khieu Sameth, court chief of Kandal province, would be replaced by Kong Srim, deputy prosecutor general of the Appeals Court. And Sin Dim, Preah Sihanouk provicial court chief, would be replaced by Yet Chakrya, currently prosecutor of Phnom Penh court.

Rights groups and justice monitors have said the country needs to strengthen its rule of law and establish a transparent judiciary free of corruption, bias and political pressure, as well as provide better training and salaries for judges and other court officials. And while the push to retire aging court officials is positive in a system that has not seen a major overhaul in three decades, observers say it is only a first step.

Lawyer Sok Sam Oeun, director of the Cambodian Defenders Project, an NGO giving free legal services to the poor, told VOA Khmer a good judicial system is necessary, and that one of strong quality and effectiveness would be better than a change of old officials.

“Changing the personnel is not enough, unless we establish first that it’s better for all judges, when they leave, to have a good judicial system, one that is transparent,” he said. “For example, one that controls cases strictly and is capable of preventing corruption, because if only the people change and the system remains the same, it’s not a change.”

Judges currently do not have real independence, he said, “and the issue of independence is not just focused on the involvement of powerful officials, but safety for judges should exist.”

The Supreme Council of Magistracy should be strengthened and penalties for judges should be strictly enforced, he said.

Kek Galabru, president of the rights group Licadho, which monitors law enforcement and the judiciary, said the government’s intentions to reform the judiciary are well known but have so far been unsuccessful.

A move to retire elderly judges and officials is good, but not fully adequate, she said, as the government still must pass a criminal code, an anti-corruption law and a law on judges.

“So reform of the court involves many laws,” she said. “If the government begins replacing judges and prosecutors as they reach a specific age, that’s the first step to start, but they should not stay at just the first step. They need to take further steps forward.”

The courts are not free from politics, just as many public sectors aren’t, she said.

“Everything is politics; in the military there are politics; in the police there are politics; in the military there are politics; in the university there are politics,” she said. “That’s why it’s difficult.”

More than politics, Cambodia’s courts face serious criticism of corruption, nepotism and bias, and international donors have long pushed for their reform.

Chan Saveth, deputy chief investigator for the rights group Adhoc, said the courts would see more confidence from citizens if their officials were not seen as under political pressure.

“People do not seem 100 percent confident, because the courts in Cambodia are seen as having much corruption and like to favor those who are powerful,” he said.

Court officials are not seen to help those who are weaker, or to provide justice to both sides, he said. “Even trying to show all the evidence is not enough, but [courts] try to rule on a case to let the side of a powerful person win.”

Meanwhile, the courts rely too much on police reports and other irregularities, he said, pointing out a number of other faults observed by rights organizations and other monitors.

“First, in hearings of criminal cases or misdemeanors, we see that our courts seem to lack integrity in showing evidence to charge or release,” he said. “And then it seems a case is judged based only on the influence or persuasiveness, which is not professional.”

“Second, another point we see in our courts in Cambodia that worries people, is when they file a complaint, they say without money there is no need to go to court,” he said. “On this point, the court should find a means, find a mechanism to make our own people be confidence in coming to the court to receive justice.”

“Third, we see that the court is under pressure from some of the powerful officials, and that’s why such non-independence causes no confidence and leads to impartial law enforcement,” he said.

“Fourth, we see that our court is at a weak stage, because the Cambodian government does not give a package of funding enough to court officials to allow the court the ability to investigate or the ability to reduce the negativity of corruption,” he said. “So this is the foundation point for a government that wants to reform this sector.”

Still, Chan Saveth welcomed the move to retire some judges and prosecutors, which would give an opportunity for new court officials to work. At the same time, the mass retirement of too many judges with a lot of experience could also be a concern, he said.

Nop Sophon is 63 years old, a former deputy chief for Phnom Penh Municipal Court and now a judge at the Ministry of Justice. His name is on the retirement list.

He told VOA Khmer in a phone interview July 21 that he did no object to retirement, but he also said he did not yet know about it.

“And who is to argue, who is to protest, if they let me retire?” he said. “If they look and see that I am still useful, they can keep using me here.”

Ven Yoeun, 61, who has worked as a prosecutor at Svay Rieng Provincial Court since 1979 and whose name is on the retirement list, said he would not regret retiring if that was the need of the government.

“If we still have strength, we regret, as we can extend for two or three more years,” he said. “But for me, my strength has declined because I have been sick for a year, and now I can do the work, but not fully. That’s why they’ve put me for retirement.”

Ven Yoeun said he was proud of the work he had done at the court.

“From the beginning, they selected me to be trained, and I recall that doing this job has helped find justice for society, for the nation, and I have worked here for more than 20 years,” he said. “I admire myself, am proud of myself, that we took the effort and did not make difficulties for society.”

He defended his court against corruption allegations, saying he has a headache when he does good work only to hear bad things on the radio.

“And with broadcasts on VOA and other radio, I’m personally ashamed and also I don’t feel I want to work here anymore, because if you do something they criticize, and if you do something a little bit wrong, they criticize, so that it’s like I myself do not work for the good of the nation and I feel ashamed of myself,” he said.

He appealed to new judges and prosecutors to avoid corruption and other acts that could invite criticism. Young judges and prosecutors will have less experience and less patience, which could create an “imbalance” in adjudicating, he said.

The prosecutor also said he would have no business plans in the future.

“If they let me retire, there is no business, because I was born a peasant who came to work just doing this job here since 1979 and there is no other business to continue to make a living,” he said.

On Samnang, 62, a former deputy court chief for Kampong Speu’s provincial court, who is also on the retirement list, said he had already put his name forward for resignation, in June. He is now a member of the Ratanakkiri Provincial Council, following the May 17 election.

“We had old age and understood that the government need not allow an extension, then we resigned anyway,” he said. “I had one term extension already.”

Younger jurists have “only theory” but no practice when they begin, he said, “but when they try hard, in the future they will be good as well, so it’s not a problem.”

“For me, I think that what the government has prepared is proper and great, in training the judge resources,” he said.

Many of Cambodia’s older judges have limited education, with some only finishing primary or secondary school. However, since 2005, the Royal Academy for Judicial Professions has graduated 173 people, who have been sent to work in various courts across the country.

Education opportunities are much more abundant for legal professionals today, with judges and prosecutors able to earn law degrees, including master’s and doctorate’s.

It remains to be seen whether the Council will vote to retire any court officials, despite the minister’s request. In February 2007, the Council failed to retire a single judge or prosecutor, raising questions about its ability to now retire 43.

In his letter to Hun Sen, Ang Vong Watana stressed that some jurists of retirement age had requested extensions—with some members of the Supreme Council of Magistracy agreeing—in what the minster deemed an obstacle to the work of the government.

The Council would be the body to decide on retirements, he wrote, but he warned that some members had the “intention to control the work of the Supreme Council of Magistracy” and that some were “making decisions for the interests of self, a group or individual, such as transferring jobs and penalties and so on,” under a pretext of independence or a “secret vote.”

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Court System Being Overhauled, Slowly

By Men Kimseng, VOA Khmer
Original report from Washington
25 May 2009


The government has already publicly recognized the importance of legal and judicial reform for development, but, despite millions of dollars in aid from donors, progress has been slow.

The new Council for Legal and Judicial Reform has so far focused on updating laws crucial to the functioning of the maligned court system and training judges and prosecutors.

And now, the government testing a project in 20 different districts where local mediation is favored over courts that may be costly for the average rural villagers.

The government has selected local courts in the provinces of Banteay Meanchey, Kampong Cham and Kandal, as well as Phnom Penh, to serve as model courts where high standards of justice are to be ensured.

“The main purpose of judicial reform is to do whatever we can to properly bring justice to people, but this reform is difficult and tough,” said Suy Mongleang, secretary-general of the General Secretariat for Legal and Judicial Reform, in a phone interview with VOA Khmer last week.

France is one of major donors building the rule of law in Cambodia, and since 2001 has been focusing on legal work such as supporting training of judges and prosecutors.

“The main challenges for legal and judicial reform in Cambodia are capacity building,” such as familiarization with legal texts and a professional code of ethics, “and deployment of this training throughout the country,” Fabyène Mansencal, a spokeswoman for the French Embassy, told VOA Khmer by e-mail.

Gaining trust is another tough job for a court that is quite often under criticism from civil society and the public for providing justice to select groups, like the rich or powerful.

Seng Theary, executive director of the Center for Social Development, acknowledges that technically the system has seen progress via training of its personnel, but the court remains influenced by politics and corruption, making the poor vulnerable.

“The court system here is a system that is corrupt and does not have the confidence of the people, because they are still afraid to use the court to find justice,” she said in an interview. “They see the court as a market where justice can be bought.”

Cambodia’s Bar Association, which receives support from Japan International Cooperation Agency, has trained more than 200 lawyers. These lawyers are free to represent any client they want, but critics say they are not independent yet.

“Sometimes, when we are independent and abide by the law too much to pressure judges, they are not happy with us,” Ang Engthong, a former president of the Bar Association who is now in charge of lawyer training, told VOA Khmer. “There are a lot of problems, and as you know in Cambodia there is lot of corruption. This has become a habit.”

Some lawyers now even act as a go-between, he said, negotiating prices between a client and a judge to ensure a favorable outcome.

Cheam Yiep, a National Assemblyman for the ruling Cambodian People’s Party, admitted corruption could be found in the court system, but argued that the system was being improved through the training of judges and prosecutors.

“It is inevitable that certain individuals in the court system commit corruption or acts of injustice and various inappropriate behaviors, as accused,” he told VOA Khmer. “There must be some, but not too many. The court system is step by step being given education, training, and self-study, to improve knowledge and technical professionalism.”

In 2005, Prime Minister Hun Sen set out an “iron fist” campaign to review irregularity in the courts. Despite much criticism from national civil parties and the international community as being a violation of judicial independence, and in what was seen as a move to please donors, Hun Sen’s public campaign was a clear acknowledgement that time was running out for judicial reform.