Cambodian-Americans petition to US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on the lifting of Sam Rainsy's immunity

November 18, 2009

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State of the United States
U.S. Department of State
2201 C StreetNW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Madam Secretary:

On November 16, 2009 the Cambodian National Assembly hastily convened to remove the parliamentarian immunity of Mr. Sam Rainsy, an elected law maker and head of the only respectable opposition party, for defending rights of farmers losing their rice fields to border encroaching neighbor.

This undoubtedly paves the way for more drummed up charges against Mr. Sam Rainsy. In a way Cambodia is under attack by its own government through willful negligence in preserving its territorial integrity and by persecuting its own citizens for standing up to defend rights of the people.

Earlier this year we followed the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission testimonies by three respected public figures from Cambodia with much interest and we are appreciative of the United States Congress for giving attention to the sad chapter in Cambodia's fledgling democracy.

Despite candid testimonies on many abusive accounts to the highest institution, the Cambodian government continues to shamelessly persecute its own citizens. America is a great democracy that world under-privileged citizens such as Cambodia look up to for hope and leadership.

Please do not leave them behind to defend themselves without a voice. Please condemn the coward acts of the Cambodian government for turning on its own citizens.

Sincerely yours,

Cambodian-American Community in America

Sacrava's Political Cartoon: Liar, Liar

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

The President of the France-Cambodia Friendship group at the French National Assembly questioned the French government on the condition of Cambodia’s opposition MPs.

At 10,045-km from Phnom Penh, the French government did not mince its words towards Cambodia. At the end of January, under questioning at the French National Assembly from Ms. Chantal Brunel, a MP from France’s UMP party, regarding the loss of their parliamentary immunity by three SRP MPs, Pierre Lellouche, the French State Secretary in charge of European Affairs, couldn’t be clearer.

Caught you telling fibs again, Mr. Hor 5 Hong!

France criticizes the political climate in Cambodia

08 Feb 2010
Cambodge Soir Hebdo
Translated from French by Tola Ek
Click here to read the article in French

KI-Media Note: Recently, Mr. Hor 5 Hong, the Cambodian minister of Foreign Affairs, boasted that not a single foreign country intervened with the Phnom Penh regime about the case of opposition leader Sam Rainsy. The following report seems to totally contradict Mr. Hor's tall tale claim once again.

The President of the France-Cambodia Friendship group at the French National Assembly questioned the French government on the condition of Cambodia’s opposition MPs.

At 10,045-km from Phnom Penh, the French government did not mince its words towards Cambodia. At the end of January, under questioning at the French National Assembly from Ms. Chantal Brunel, a MP from France’s UMP party, regarding the loss of their parliamentary immunity by three SRP MPs, Pierre Lellouche, the French State Secretary in charge of European Affairs, couldn’t be clearer.

“At each of these episodes, we expressed our concerns and our worries regarding the recurring defamation lawsuits aimed at lifting the immunity of [Cambodian] opposition MPs. We cannot accept this practice which is nothing more than intimidation. Our embassy in Phnom Penh, in liaison with our EU partners, had taken all the opportunities to remind the Cambodian authority our attachment to the respect of democratic debate,” Pierre Lellouche explained while citing also the lawsuits launched by the government “against civil society and media representatives.”

In her question, Ms. Chantal Brunel, the President of the France-Cambodia Friendship group, underscored the fact that Cambodia, following China, is “the Asian country which receives from France the largest amount of development aid,” and that the French financial aids were all aimed “to the benefit of the democratization of the country.”

This exchange was taking place while France and Cambodia are opening discussions on a new phase of cooperation aimed at economic development which should be concluded by the visit to Cambodia by the French minister of Foreign Affairs at the end of the first semester of 2010.

IPU “Deeply Concerned” by Lifting of Parliamentary Immunity of Cambodian Opposition MPs

February 10, 2010
Source: SRP

IPU “DEEPLY CONCERNED” BY LIFTING OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY OF CAMBODIAN OPPOSITION MPs

In a late January decision of its Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians, the Geneva-based Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) said it “is deeply concerned at the lifting of Mr. Sam Rainsy’s parliamentary immunity for the same reasons as the ones it has expressed in the cases of opposition parliamentarians Ho Vann and Mu Sochua, namely that without proper examination of the request for the lifting of immunity, without an open and public parliamentary debate, during which the parliamentarians concerned can present their arguments, without a secret vote, parliamentary immunity is reduced to a mere formality and is thus meaningless.”

The IPU also “expresses further concern at the charges laid against Mr. Sam Rainsy which, in the light of the information before it, appear highly questionable.”

Full text of the IPU decision at http://tinyurl.com/yhcb9kj

SRP Members of Parliament

French govt questions CPP tactics

Friday, 05 February 2010
Sebastian Strangio
The Phnom Penh Post

FRENCH government officials have expressed concerns about the suspension of the parliamentary immunity of lawmakers from the opposition Sam Rainsy Party, according to a statement issued by the party on Thursday.

During a debate in France’s National Assembly on Thursday, the statement said, Foreign Affairs State Secretary Pierre Lellouche said that his nation “deplored” decisions stripping parliamentary immunity from SRP lawmakers Sam Rainsy, Mu Sochua and Ho Vann in 2009.

“We cannot accept these practices, which pertain to intimidation,” Lellouche said in response to a question from Chantal Brunel, chairwoman of the France-Cambodia Friendship Group at the Assembly. He added that the French government will continue to pay “close attention” and “actively follow” the situation facing the opposition in Cambodia.

When contacted on Thursday, Phay Siphan, spokesman for the Council of Ministers, said the French lawmakers clearly did not know the full story behind the suspension of the lawmakers’ immunity.

“We respect if there is a concern about this situation, but for me and for the government, those [French] parliamentarians should come and learn exactly what is involved,” he said, adding that the actions had been taken in accordance with the government’s commitment to the rule of law.

“We have to implement the rule of law,” he added.

“Everybody is under one law together.”

French Government Advocates Respect For Political Pluralism And Democratic Debate In Cambodia

Left to right: Sam Rainsy, Ho Vann and Mu Sochua (Photo: The Phnom Penh Post)

February 4, 2008

FRENCH GOVERNMENT ADVOCATES RESPECT FOR POLITICAL PLURALISM AND DEMOCRATIC DEBATE IN CAMBODIA

Responding on January 28 to a question from French parliamentarian Chantal Brunel, Chairperson of France-Cambodia Friendship Group at the French National Assembly, Foreign Affairs State Secretary Pierre Lellouche declared that the Paris government is “preoccupied” by the situation facing the opposition Sam Rainsy Party in Cambodia.

Besides the case of SRP leader Sam Rainsy who has been recently prosecuted, the French government is also “worried” about the removal of the parliamentary immunity of Ho Vann and Mu Sochua, two other National Assembly members from the SRP.

About the recurrent lifting of opposition parliamentarians’ immunity and their subsequent trials, which the French government “deplores,” State Secretary Pierre Lellouche said, “We cannot accept these practices, which pertain to intimidation.” He stressed the importance that France attaches to the “respect for political pluralism and democratic debate” in Cambodia.

In conclusion, the French government will continue to pay “close attention” and to “actively follow” the situation facing the opposition in Cambodia.

To read the official minutes of the debate in French please click at http://tinyurl.com/ya6nl75

SRP Members of Parliament

Ros Visal's letter to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

December 17, 2009

The Honorable Ann Syauta, Human Rights Officer
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

United Nations
Room DC2-1230
2 United Nations
New York, NY 10017

Dear Excellency Syauta,

I am writing to you today out of my deepest concerns for the rapid declining state of democracy in Cambodia. Furthermore, I wish to seek your support and intervention to end the Cambodian government’s policy and practices of forced land evictions in the name of development. On-going land grabbing activity has been increasingly widespread throughout the country. It has caused enormous pain and suffering, with unimaginable long term consequences to the lives of many poor, defenseless people. Much of those inhumane activities have been well documented by human rights organization such as LICAHDO, Human Rights Watch, and Center for Human Rights in Cambodia.

Defamation law has severe restrictions on fundamental of human freedom and liberties. It is truly a legal tool designed to effectively silencing any critics of the Cambodian government, corrupted officials as well as their relatives. In all cases, the Cambodian government and their corrupted officials has used its controlled courts to convict anyone, journalists, victims of land disputes, political activists, and even the people’s elected representatives. For example, on November 16, 2009, the National Assembly voted to lift the parliamentary immunity of Mr. Sam Rainsy, leader of the official opposition. It was done without any regard for his elected rights or the people whom he represented.

The immunity-stripping of Mr. Sam Rainsy is indicative to what lies ahead for a country which has become less and less tolerant on freedom of speech and expression by its people. It sends a very clear threatening message to all representatives of the people.

Cambodia is moving away from democracy, from its international obligations signed under Paris Peace Accord 1991. All country’s main institutions are either directly or indirectly controlled by the executive branch. The judiciary system is not independent as it should be. Cambodia has become a nation ruled by tyrant, camouflaged with a fake “Democracy,” while in reality it lacks all the central components to be called or recognized as such.

We seek your support to end the on-going erosion of civil liberties, and systematic human rights violations in Cambodia by putting the Cambodian government on notice that such abuses can no longer be tolerated.

Thank you for your precious time and your utmost consideration to this matter.

Sincerely yours,

Ros, Visal
Email: samrainsyparty.usa@gmail.com

Remember Hun Sen? Mu Sochua does

Written by William T. Dowell
The Essential Edge (Geneva, Switzerland)

GENEVA--Mu Sochua, one of the more impressive speakers at "Courage to Lead," a gathering of more than 40 women involved in human rights last week, is not a woman to be taken lightly. After spending the last twenty years fighting against both human trafficking and general corruption in Cambodia, the deputy in Cambodia's leading opposition party has embroiled herself in a head-on clash with the country's perennial prime minister, Hun Sen. The spat now seems likely to land her in jail. At a superficial glance, the furor seems slightly silly. It began last spring when Mu Sochua protested against a Cambodian army officer using official government vehicles at public expense to campaign for Hun Sen's political party. A scuffle ensued and Mu Sochua's blouse accidentally ripped open. Hun Senwho likes to go by the rather ungainly honorific, "Samdach Akkak Moha Sena Padey Dekjo," referred to the incident in a speech, vulgarly dismissing Mu Sochua as a hustler, who liked to expose herself and had a propensity for grabbing at men. If the Samdach expected Mu Sochua to roll over, he was wrong. Mu Sochua promptly sued him for defamation in a Phnom Penh municipal court, demanding 500 Cambodian riels, or roughly 12 cents in damages along with an apology. Instead of apologizing, Hun Sen, promptly countersued and taunted Mu Sochua to appeal to the World Court if she thought it would do any good.

Not surprisingly Mu Sochua's case was thrown out of Phnom Penh's municipal court, while Hun Sen's countersuit stuck. Mu Sochua's parliamentary immunity was stripped away. An appeals court confirmed a lower court's verdict against her for libel, and the case is now headed for the Cambodia's Supreme Court, which Mu Sochua also expects to rule in favor of the "Samdach." The penalty for losing the suit is a fine of roughly $4,100, but Mu Sochua refuses to pay it, and insists that she will go to jail for six months instead.

It may all seem like much ado about not very much, but Mu Sochua insists that there is a lot more at stake. Hun Sen, who was propelled into his current position after Vietnam ousted Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in 1979, has held onto power ever since by making sure that his party hand picks Cambodia's 13,000 village chiefs. "This nation has to be built on the rule of law and not just one man," says Mu Sochua. "These people are afraid of democracy. The way they maintain control is by not allowing the people to elect their village chiefs. The Cambodian people live in fear of the village chiefs. At the same time the country has opened itself up to a market economy, which brings in a lot of money that is not managed well, which is why there is so much corruption."

Hun Sen, who at 57, shows no signs of planning on early retirement, has plenty of reason for wanting to take on Mu Sochua's party. In November, he had, Sam Rainsy, who leads the opposition, stripped of parliamentary immunity for the second time this year: the reason, Sam Rainsy had removed several posts marking out the border with Vietnam. Rainsy contends that the Vietnamese, who were responsible for Hun Sen's rise to power in Cambodia, have been engaged in a land grab for themselves based on questionable treaty arrangements.

Mu Sochua insists that her spat focuses on Hun Sen's vulgar use of language and the corruption of Cambodia's legal system. "What is at stake," she says, "is democracy. The space for democracy is narrowed by the power of the ruling party, and mainly by the power of Hun Sen, who has his hands in every institution, including the parliament and the courts. He didn't just insult me as a woman. He insulted the parliament as an institution. I am actually taking the justice system itself to court."

The story gets a bit more complicated since Mu Sochua received a 2005 leadership award from Vital Voices Global Parntership, a Washington DC-based foundation which grew out of the US government sponsored Vital Voices for Democracy Initiative, co-founded by Hillary Rodham Clinton and Madeleine Albright in 1997.

"This is also a challenge for the international community," Mu Sochua says. "They invest $1 billion a year in Cambodia, but they never fulfilled their responsibilities by making it a condition that the government fulfills its obligations towards the human rights of its own people." Hillary Clinton delivered a brief address via satellite at the end of the Geneva meeting, but it was not clear what her take as Secretary of State would be on Mu Sochua's case.

Even more potentially troublesome for Hun Sen is the fact that Mu Sochua, who earned a Bachelor of Arts in psychology at San Francisco State, and a masters in Social Work at UC Berkely, is married to an American who runs a major project on decentralization for the United Nations in Cambodia. "My husband is completely separate from my political life," she explains. Her three children now live abroad, but both her husband and children are emotionally supportive. "I told my family that I am going to jail. Please don't talk me out of it. It has come to that point" Mom is going to jail," she says. "It gives me peace in heart." Whether it gives Hun Sen or his supporters peace of mind is another matter. More information on Mu Sochua is available at her website: http://musochua.org
----------
The 3-day conference, "Courage to Lead," was organized at the International Labor Organization last week by Allida Black, the director and editor of George Washington University's Eleanor Roosevelt Papers Project, and it was supported by Vital Voices Global Partnership, which works to promote the status of women and to encourage women to become leaders worldwide. The partnership grew out of the US government's Vital Voices Democracy Initiative, which was launched in 1997 by Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright.

The Eleanor Roosevelt Papers Project seeks to carry on with the tradition of Mrs. Roosevelt, who was one of the early proponents of the idea that everyone should have access to basic human rights. Allida Black, who is something of a fireball herself, continues to carry the flame.

The Eleanor Roosevelt Papers Project is on line at: http://gwu.edu/~erpapers/
Vital Voices is online at: http://vitalvoices.org.

Sam Rainsy faces charges in removal of border markers [-The CPP is going to great length to serve their Yuon masters]

Opposition leader Sam Rainsy (Photo: Ayuthyea, RFA)

Monday, 14 December 2009
Uong Ratana
The Phnom Penh Post

SAM Rainsy says he is facing criminal charges in Svay Rieng provincial court in connection with an October incident in which he uprooted markers on the border with Vietnam, as opposition party members prepare to travel to the contested area today to investigate alleged encroachment by Vietnamese farmers.

“We have decided to indict and detain Sam Rainsy and his accomplices,” Svay Rieng provincial court prosecutor Keo Sothear wrote in a November 24 investigating warrant, according to a document provided by Sam Rainsy.

The president of the eponymous political party is being charged with incitement causing racial discrimination and destruction of property under Articles 52 and 61 of the UNTAC Criminal Code, the document states. Svay Rieng officials could not be reached for comment.

On October 25, Sam Rainsy joined Svay Rieng residents in uprooting the markers to protest against what locals say is Vietnamese encroachment onto Cambodian land.

"WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR BECAUSE WE HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG."

Cambodian officials have said the markers were placed only on a temporary basis and did not represent an official demarcation.

Sam Rainsy was stripped of his parliamentary immunity during a closed session of the National Assembly on November 16, paving the way for his prosecution in this case. But Choung Chou Ngy, Sam Rainsy’s lawyer, said he thought his client had little to fear from the court.

“Sam Rainsy did nothing wrong, because the location where the border demarcation posts were placed was in the [Cambodian] citizens’ ricefield,” he said.

In a statement issued October 30, Vietnam’s foreign ministry condemned Sam Rainsy’s actions and asked Cambodia to protect the nations’ ongoing border-demarcation process.

The statement called Sam Rainsy’s act “perverse, undermining common assets, violating laws of Cambodia and Vietnam, treaties, agreements and deals between the two countries”.

Var Kimhong, senior minister in charge of border affairs, said the visit to the Vietnamese border in Svay Rieng planned by the SRP would be illegal in the absence of permission from Vietnamese authorities.

The parliamentarians could disrupt the investigation of Sam Rainsy, he said.

SRP spokesman Yim Sovann dismissed the charges as an attempt to intimidate the opposition.

“We have nothing to fear because we have done nothing wrong,” he said, adding that today’s trip to the border is necessary because “as parliamentarians, we have to check the place where the people have complained, because we have all sworn to defend Cambodian territory”.

No Human Rights for Human Rights Defenders

10 December 2009

NO HUMAN RIGHTS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS

My parliamentary immunity was removed by the National Assembly on 16 November 2009 for the second time this year and only five months after the immunity of two other opposition lawmakers, Ms. Mu Sochua and Mr. Ho Van, was removed. The National Assembly is not independent and effectively “rubber stamps” political decisions made by the Cambodian People’s Party and Prime Minister Hun Sen. It spends its time doing this instead of defending the interests of the nation and the interests of the ordinary Khmer people such as poor and vulnerable farmers who are losing their vital rice fields and other farmland to the rich and powerful.

Worth noting are the following points concerning the rights of Members of Parliament as stipulated in Article 80 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia:

• Members of Parliament shall have parliamentary immunity.
• No Member of Parliament shall be prosecuted, detained or arrested because of opinions expressed during the exercise of his or her duties.

The CPP-controlled National Assembly claims that procedures have been strictly followed for the removal of my immunity as they have for the removal of my colleagues' immunity. This is simply not the case. I wish to point to the following:

• The National Assembly Standing Committee merely complied with a request by the Ministry of Justice to remove our immunity without conducting its own investigation into the charges against us. In doing so, the Standing Committee showed that it is a mere tool of the Executive Branch.
• The National Assembly voted in a closed-door session to strip me of my immunity in a clearly undemocratic process.
• Local and national press, foreign diplomats, and other observers were refused entry into the National Assembly during the vote so as to avoid public scrutiny.
• To date, I have not seen any official documents related to the charges which have supposedly been brought against me by the Svay Rieng Provincial Court.
• On 26 October 2009, MP Son Chhay wrote to the President of the National Assembly recommending that a parliamentary committee be formed with MPs from all political parties with seats in Parliament to investigate land conflicts in Svay Rieng province. This request is in accordance with the Internal Rules of the National Assembly. To date, the request has not been met.
• On 13 November 2009, 15 opposition MPs from the SRP wrote to the President of the National Assembly requesting the postponement of the removal of my immunity scheduled for 16 November. The request was officially denied on 15 November.

Let me clarify the real issue in Samraong commune, Svay Rieng province where the 25 October incident took place:

His Majesty King Father Norodom Sihanouk has shown His concern for the situation in Cambodia’s provinces bordering Vietnam. Reacting to a report I submitted to Him on 7 November 2009 about Cambodian farmers losing their land because of border encroachments by the Vietnamese authorities in Svay Rieng province, the Retired King wrote to Prime Minister Hun Sen asking for an examination of the information and evidence I had exposed on the issue.

Rather than respond in an appropriate way to the King Father, the Hun Sen government reacted by undemocratically removing my parliamentary immunity in order to prosecute me because I dared raise an important national issue that is embarrassing for the prime minister.

At his 16 November 2009 press conference, Mr. Var Kim Hong, Advisor to the Royal Government in Charge of State Border Affairs, made two important points:

• the border posts [I pulled out] are temporary markings of the border line (moreover, Mr. Trinh Ba Cam, a spokesman for the Vietnamese Embassy in Phnom Penh, was quoted in The Cambodia Daily, 2 November, as specifying, “The wooden posts [Sam Rainsy is accused of having pulled out] were not official markings for the border”);
• the posts were on villagers' land [which is their private and legal property].

Article 44 of the Constitution stipulates:

“All persons, individually or collectively, shall have the right to ownership. Only Khmer legal entities and citizens of Khmer nationality shall have the right to own land.

Legal private ownership shall be protected by law. The right to confiscate possessions from any person shall be exercised only in the public interest as provided for under law and shall required fair and just compensation in advance.”

The villagers/owners of the farm land were neither consulted nor were they advised of the confiscation of or trespassing on their land. In accordance with the Constitution, the villagers in Samraong commune are the legal owners of their rice fields. The "temporary" border demarcation posts were planted in their lands without their consent in contravention of the Constitution. They therefore have the right to bring their concerns to their elected representatives, to seek legal action and to seek financial compensation.

According to the Constitution, I have the full right to perform my functions as an elected representative of the people. I am entitled to speak freely and to enjoy parliamentary immunity privileges. In any event, I have committed no crime.

Once again, the government of Cambodia is using the courts which are well known to be its political tool, to silence government critics and, in particular, to suppress the voice and rights of the opposition. They can purport to remove my parliamentary immunity. They will not silence me.

In his address to the UN Human Rights Council on 26 September 2009, the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General for human rights in Cambodia said that the government had used prosecutors and judges, while pretending to uphold their independence, to intimidate or punish critics. He stated that the government had applied the law selectively and that its supporters had enjoyed immunities from the civil and criminal process for blatant breaches of the law.

I call on the international community to question the political commitment of the Cambodian government led by Mr. Hun Sen to the rule of law and to judicial reforms. I call on the donor community to condemn Cambodia's National Assembly for lacking the political will to protect the rights of all Members of Parliament and for failing to defend the independence of this institution whose primary role is to serve the people it represents and to uphold the most fundamental principles of human rights and democracy.

The alleged crimes of the opposition lawmakers all stem from our service and accountability to the people and our public expression of opinions that are seen as a serious challenge to the power of the CPP, the party in power.

As my colleagues, I am only a representative, a spokesman and a messenger for countless victims of abuses and injustice. I am only saying aloud the many things are going wrong in this country. I hold grave fears for the future of Cambodia.

By condemning me through the undemocratic and farcical removal of my parliamentary immunity, the National Assembly serves to condemn the people of Cambodia to further oppression and the failure of democracy.

Sam Rainsy
Member of Parliament

Cambodia Power Play

The beleaguered opposition leader is under threat again.

DECEMBER 4, 2009
By CARLYLE A. THAYER
OPINION ASIA
The Wall Street Journal

It's been more than a decade since armed militia and security forces loyal to Cambodian strongman Hun Sen violently suppressed the democratic opposition to consolidate the Cambodian People's Party (CPP) in power, and the country is once again on the brink of another political upheaval. This time, the battle lines are being drawn in courts rather than in the streets, but the effect will be the same—the slow but sure consolidation of authoritarian rule.

The immediate issue is the political future of opposition leader Sam Rainsy. Late last month, he tried to score political points against the Hun Sen administration by claiming Vietnam had "stolen" Khmer land by placing demarcation markers inside Cambodian territory. Border politics are a potent tool in Cambodia. Mr. Rainsy proceeded to uproot six wooden poles marking the border area and took them to Phnom Penh to press for an investigation. Vietnam officially voiced its concern.

Rather than let the issue rest, deputies from Mr. Hun Sen's ruling CPP unanimously voted on November 16 to strip Mr. Rainsy of his parliamentary immunity for the second time this year. They can do that because the CPP holds 90 seats in the 123-seat lower house of the National Assembly.

This is no ordinary censure. The legislature's action clears all legal impediments for a provincial court to charge Mr. Rainsy with willfully destroying property. If charged and found guilty by the provincial court, the opposition leader could be subject to impeachment in the National Assembly. And Cambodia would lose one of its most effective—and internationally known—opposition political voices against Mr. Hun Sen's regime.

Cambodians can rightly see this as a step backward in what has already been a struggle to consolidate democracy in their country. Since the Khmer Rouge conflict ended in 1991, the country has held four flawed national elections. For the first three ballots, no party was able to form a two-thirds majority to govern, which made it tough for Mr. Hun Sen to consolidate his power. Mr. Rainsy's secular nationalist party eclipsed the former royalist camp to become the main opposition force in the country.

Last year, Mr. Hun Sen's CPP won 73% of the total seats in a ballot marked by irregularities and administrative faults. CPP rule rests on genuine popularity at rice roots level through its economic development policies and nationalism in defense of Cambodia's territorial sovereignty vis-à-vis Thailand. Mr. Hun Sen's aggressive handling of the dispute with Thailand over land surrounding Preah Vihear temple in 2008 was a vote getter.

But as Kek Galabru, a leading human-rights activist noted at the time, "The ruling party will have the right to amend laws and strip parliamentary immunity from critics. We are afraid our democratic state will shrink and shrink." She has a point: The CPP is not only the dominant political force at the local level, but has also entrenched itself in power through control of the police, civil bureaucracy, judiciary and armed forces.

Faced with opposition threats to boycott the official swearing-in ceremonies, Mr. Hun Sen agreed to amend National Assembly rules to acknowledge the official role of the opposition and opposition leader, provide budgetary support and full immunity for all deputies. Last month's parliamentary decision not only puts that deal at risk, but is a stark reminder that 16 years after United Nations intervention, democracy has not been consolidated in Cambodia. The CCP regularly uses its levers of power to weaken the opposition by enticing defections or intimidating voters, as foreign election observers have noted. CPP-influenced courts regularly dismiss lawsuits brought against the government while convicting opposition deputies of defamation.

Mr. Rainsy certainly understands what's at stake. The day after he was stripped of his immunity Mr. Rainsy flew to Brussels, where he raised his plight with the European Parliament and International Parliamentary Union. According to Mr. Rainsy, "As a matter of principle, [the European Parliament] demands that there be a proper investigation." It is unclear when or if he will return to the country.

Mr. Hun Sen probably will eventually restore Mr. Rainsy's immunity after extracting a symbolic expression of regret for his actions. This is all part of Mr. Hun Sen's style of demonstrating that the CPP holds ultimate power. But no one should be fooled that Mr. Hun Sen's encroachments on the opposition are growing less serious. The international community, and particularly aid donors, must bring pressure to bear on Cambodia by supporting the European Parliament's call for an investigation into Mr. Hun Sen's handling of this matter. Other governments should also lobby Phnom Penh to make it harder for the National Assembly to strip immunity from a deputy.

In the longer term, donors must continue programs to enhance the capability of civil society groups, the media and elected parliamentarians to provide effective checks and balances. While the CPP is popular at the moment, it won't necessarily stay that way forever. Cambodians deserve the right to a choice, and part of that means ensuring the survival of a genuine opposition.

Mr. Thayer is professor of politics at the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra.

Sam Rainsy Supporters Protest at Embassy in US

Cambodia-Americans protested in front of Cambodian Embassy in Washington DC

By Pin Sisovann, VOA Khmer
Original report from Washington
02 December 2009

Click here to listen to the audio program (MP3)

Supporters of opposition leader Sam Rainsy demonstrated in front of the Cambodian Embassy in Washington Saturday, upset over recent criminal charges against him and the suspension of his parliamentary immunity.

Nearly 100 protesters met around 10:30 am, carrying placards in support of Sam Rainsy, who faces charges for allegedly inciting villagers in Svay Rieng province to pull border markers from the ground.

Sam Rainsy has said the villagers were upset at perceived Vietnamese encroachment onto their rice fields.

One banner read, “No Sam Rainsy Immunity, No Democracy.” Others showed figures in Vietnamese-style hats embracing and biting Cambodia.

“This non-violent demonstration shows that Cambodians are against the stripping of Sam Rainsy’s immunity, pressure on democracy in Cambodia and the loss of Cambodian territory,” said Chhan Touch, an organizer of the protest.

Demonstrators were not met by embassy officials.

“We are very upset that we have an embassy in this country,” said a protester named Men Vannak. “It is supposed to respond to the people’s call for help. But now no one came out to take our petition. We are very upset.”

Embassy officials could not be immediately reached for comment. At least one figure appeared to be filming the demonstration from an embassy window.

Chhan Touch said he would continue to communicate with the embassy and would try to send the petition by e-mail.

Sam Rainsy addressed the protesters, from France, via a telephone amplified by a megaphone.

“Our brothers and sisters in Washington, DC, are protesting to show a spirit of nationalism and support for democracy,” he said. “I am happy and excited…. I am not scared… A million thanks, and goodbye for now.”

Demonstrators replied with cries of “Long live Sam Rainsy!”

Reached in Cambodia, Council of Ministers spokesman Phay Siphan said Sam Rainsy’s policies aimed at inciting unrest and creating a conflict between Cambodia and Vietnam.

He praised a recent request by Sam Rainsy Party lawmaker Son Chhay requesting government officials to appear before the National Assembly to be questioned over border issues.

Cambodia’s relationship with Vietnam is politically difficult. The Vietnamese ousted the Khmer Rouge, in 1979, but then undertook a decade-long occupation that rankles many Cambodians today.

Sam Rainsy supporters were angered by the removal of his immunity by the National Assembly on Nov. 16, less than two weeks after Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung called on the Cambodian government to take “due measures” in dealing with the opposition leader’s alleged role in the border marker event.

Sam Rainsy has called the suspension proof of Cambodia’s inferior position to Vietnam.

Nguon Nhel, vice president of the National Assembly, denied the allegation.

“The Cambodian government was not frightened by the Vietnamese government,” he said by phone from Cambodia. “The border demarcation was decided on by a committee from both countries. If any lawmaker or committee has questions about the border, they have the right to invite the concerned government officials for questioning by the National Assembly or by committee.”

More photos of SRP protest in front of the Cambodian embassy in Washington DC

Sam Rainsy backers protest abroad

Supporters of opposition leader Sam Rainsy wave placards during a demonstration against the “deterioration of democracy in Cambodia” on Parliament Hill in the Canadian capital, Ottawa, on Monday. Hundreds gathered to protest against the Cambodian government’s alleged mistreatment of opposition politicians. (Photo by: Photo Supplied)

Tuesday, 01 December 2009
Irwin Loy
The Phnom Penh Post

SUPPORTERS of embattled opposition leader Sam Rainsy gathered in North American capitals this weekend to protest what they called the deteriorating state of democracy in Cambodia.

Organised as a response to the National Assembly’s decision last month to strip Sam Rainsy of his parliamentary immunity, nearly 200 people protested on Parliament Hill in the Canadian capital, Ottawa, while a smaller group demonstrated in front of the Cambodian embassy in Washington on Saturday, organisers said.

Pretty Ma, secretary general of the Sam Rainsy Party North America, said opposition politicians in the Kingdom face “mistreatment and harassment”.

“The way immunity can be easily revoked from the people’s representatives is something almost unheard of here in the West,” he wrote in an email. “It’s overdone, truly abusive and ridiculous.”

The protesters urged Canada and the US to deny entry visas to “any corrupted official, including any human rights violators”.

Sam Rainsy, who is currently in Europe, was stripped of his immunity last month after an October incident in which he uprooted six wooden posts in Svay Rieng province along the border with Vietnam.

Villagers had claimed the Vietnamese were encroaching on their land.

The Vietnamese government, however, reacted with outrage, and the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the act “perverse”.

Demonstration in front of the Cambodian embassy in Washington DC on 28 November 2009

COMMUNIQUÉ

In United States of America, the founding father of democracy, our adopted home that we, as Cambodian-American, victims of past communist regimes, are able to gather to express our views freely as free men. Not in Cambodia, our former country where democracy has merely existed on paper, and in theory - NOT in real life. Freedom of speech and the press has been taken away to a larger extend , so did was our freedom to a peaceful assembly. Today’s demonstration would have landed all participants in prison, if it were held in Cambodia. As such, we could not be free in Cambodia and so the same can be said to an entire population of Cambodia who are currently waking up to a new reality of political oppression orchestrated under the criminalized defamation act.

As Cambodian-American, we come together on this November 28, 2009, to express our deepest concerns to the deterioration state of democracy in Cambodia once enjoyed under UNTAC. Furthermore, to call on our United States government and donors’ countries to put an end to the systemic violation of human rights and freedom orchestrated by the Cambodian authorities. It is the only way to ensure long term peace and stability of the country as well as the region as stipulated under the spirit of signed Paris Peace Accord 1991.

Since the Cambodian executive body has effective control over three branches of the government, it has used the courts to effectively criminalize anyone on defamation charges, placing strict restriction on freedom of speech, the press and expression. Several journalists and other critics of the government have been imprisoned as a result of such practices. These limits on freedoms are unconstitutional, in clear violation of the country’s main constitution.

The stripping immunity from elected members of parliament (MP), Mr. Sam Rainsy, Mrs. Mu Sochua, and Mr. Ho Vann, is a way to intimidate and silence opposition critics. It discourages people’s representatives from speaking out critical of government policies. Furthermore, it prevented them from fulfilling their elected roles and responsibilities.

These are the reasons which led to our gathering today:

1. Cambodia has no real separation of powers, only in theory.
2. Cambodian National Assembly functions merely as a rubber-stamp institution
3. Cambodian Courts are systematically biased - NOT an independent body.
4. Legal professionals are subjected to government intimidation as in the case of MP. Mu Sochua vs. PM Hun Sen.
5. Journalists and government critics have been jailed or killed while others remain outside the country, convicted in absentia on bogus defamation charges.
6. Cambodian government has aggressively acted to seal the mouths of its critics and its political oppositions through defamation law.
7. On-going land evictions have cause severe hardship on Cambodian victims across the country.
8. International Emergency aids were selectively and intentionally given to only the government’s party members and their families while denying others belonging to an opposition groups (reported on Radio Free Asia).
9. Stripping immunity from elected members of parliament without any regard for the rights or any concerns of the people whom they represented at their districts.
10. Political killing and persecution still remain part of the Cambodian government’s back-room policy. One opposition activist has been recently axed to death, while many have fled overseas to escape jail times convicted on defamation charges.
11. There is an issue with respect to the violation of Cambodian territorial integrity.

WITH ABOVE FORE-MENTIONED, WE SEEK OUR UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND DONORS’ COUNTRIES TO PROCEED WITH THE NINE -POINTS RESOLUTIONS BELOW :

1. Reconvene on the signed Paris Peace Accord of 1991.

2. Pressure Cambodian government to respect its international obligations signed under the Paris Peace Accord of 1991.

3. Pressure Cambodian government to end the erosion process of civil liberties by calling for an end to its authoritarian policy and practices.

4. Call for an immediate restoration of immunities to all elected members of the National Assembly: Mr. Sam Rainsy, Mrs. Mu Sochua and Mr. Ho Vann.

5. Take all necessary steps to force for an overhaul to the highly corrupted Cambodian judiciary system. It’s a must, since the court itself has been totally corrupted through a well managed patronage scheme - Reward and Punishment.

6. Call for releases of all imprisoned journalists and an end to political persecution.

7. Condemn the flawed defamation law which has been used unconstitutionally to suppress people’s rights and freedom on issues critical to corruption and government’s improper activities.

8. Call for an end to forced land evictions.

9. Revoke as well as NOT providing Visa entries into the country by any corrupted official, including any human rights violators.

On this day, November 28, 2009 in Washington, DC our nation’s capital, in front of the Royal Cambodian Embassy, we, as participants in this demonstration, with strong belief and conviction to the cause of human freedom and liberties in Cambodia, wish to submit this petition for your utmost attention and consideration.

Sam Rainsy: I will recover my immunity back soon

29 Nov 2009
By Kuoch Kunteara
Radio France Internationale
Translated from Khmer by Heng Soy
Click here to read the article in Khmer

On Sunday 29 November, Sam Rainsy, SRP President who is currently staying in France, called on the government to carefully think about the border problems, both the eastern and western borders. At the same time, Sam Rainsy hoped that he will soon recover his immunity back. However, he did not indicate the date of his return back to Cambodia.

Click here to listen to the audio program (MP3)
or
Click here

Communiqué from the 28 Nov 2009 demonstrators in Ottawa, Canada

COMMUNIQUÉ

Canada, our adopted home, a nation which holds truths to basic principles and values of human rights, freedom and democracy, that we, as Cambodian-Canadian, once victims of past communist regimes, are able to gather to express our views freely as free men. Not in Cambodia, our former country where democracy has merely existed on paper, and in theory - NOT in real life. Freedom of speech and the press has been taken away to a larger extend, so did was our freedom to a peaceful assembly. Today’s demonstration would have landed all participants in prison, if it were held in Cambodia. As such, we could not be free in Cambodia and so the same can be said to an entire population of Cambodia who are currently waking up to a new reality of political oppression orchestrated under the criminalized defamation act.

As Cambodian-Canadian, we come together on this November 28, 2009, to express our deepest concerns to the deterioration state of democracy in Cambodia once enjoyed under UNTAC. Furthermore, to call on our great Canadian government and donors’ countries to put an end to the systemic violation of human rights and freedom orchestrated by the Cambodian authorities. It is the only way to ensure long term peace and stability of the country as well as the region as stipulated under the spirit of signed Paris Peace Accord 1991.

Since the Cambodian executive body has effective control over three branches of the government, it has used the courts to effectively criminalize anyone on defamation charges, placing strict restriction on freedom of speech, the press and expression. Several journalists and other critics of the government have been imprisoned as a result of such practices.

The stripping immunity from elected members of parliament (MP), Mr. Sam Rainsy, Mrs. Mu Sochua, and Mr. Ho Vann, is a way to intimidate and silence opposition critics. It discourages people’s representatives from speaking out critical of government policies. Furthermore, it prevented them from fulfilling their elected roles and responsibilities.

These are the reasons which led to our gathering today:

1. Cambodia has no real separation of powers, only in theory.
2. Cambodian National Assembly functions merely as a rubber-stamp institution
3. Cambodian Courts are systematically biased - NOT an independent body.
4. Legal professionals are subjected to government intimidation as in the case of MP. Mu Sochua vs. PM Hun Sen.
5. Journalists and government critics have been jailed or killed while others remain outside the country, convicted in absentia on bogus defamation charges.
6. Cambodian government has aggressively acted to seal the mouths of its critics and its political oppositions through its highly vague defamation act.
7. On-going land evictions have caused severe hardship on Cambodian victims across the country.
8. International Emergency aids were selectively and intentionally given to only the government’s party members and their families while denying others belonging to an opposition groups (reported on Radio Free Asia).
9. Stripping immunity from elected members of parliament without any regard for the rights or any concerns of the people whom they represented at their districts.
10. Political killings and persecution still remain problematic for those who seek to involve in the process. One opposition activist has been recently axed to death, while many have fled overseas to escape jail times convicted on defamation charges.

WITH ABOVE FORE-MENTIONED, WE SEEK INTERVENTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA AND DONORS’ COUNTRIES TO PROCEED WITH THE NINE-POINTS RESOLUTIONS BELOW:

1. Reconvene on the signed Paris Peace Accord of 1991.
2. Pressure Cambodian government to respect its international obligations signed under the Paris Peace Accord of 1991.
3. Pressure Cambodian government to end the erosion process of civil liberties by calling for an end to its authoritarian policy and practices.
4. Call for an immediate restoration of immunities to all elected members of the National Assembly: Mr. Sam Rainsy, Mrs. Mu Sochua and Mr. Ho Vann.
5. Take all necessary steps to force for an overhaul to the highly corrupted Cambodian judiciary system. It’s a must, since the court itself has been totally corrupted through a well managed patronage scheme - Reward and Punishment.
6. Call for releases of all imprisoned journalists and an end to political persecution.
7. Condemn the flawed defamation law which has been used unconstitutionally to suppress people’s rights and freedom on issues critical to corruption and government’s improper activities.
8. Call for an end to forced land evictions.
9. Revoke as well as NOT providing Visa entries into the country by any corrupted official, including any human rights violators.

On this day, November 28, 2009, on Parliament Hill, Ottawa, we, as participants in this demonstration, with strong belief and conviction to the cause of human freedom and liberties in Cambodia, hereby submitted this petition for your utmost attention and consideration.

Border between Cambodia and Vietnam: The Trial

Click on the statement in Khmer to zoom in

Unofficial translation from French by Tola Ek
CFC/CBC 23112009F

Border between Cambodia and Vietnam: The Trial

What is the cost for uprooting wooden stakes planted in the mud of a rice field? The author of this act is currently being charged of “crimes for destruction of public properties and threat against national security.” Yes, you read it right: this is not out of a bad fiction story, this is the reality that reflects the current Hun Sen’s regime in Cambodia.

It turns out that these wooden posts represent temporary stakes for a border post between Vietnam and Cambodia, and they happen to be located in the Cambodian district of Chantrea, Svay Rieng province. The marking operation was conducted by technicians working for the joint Vietnamese-Cambodian government committee, following the official recognition of territorial treaties – which, by the way, are illegal – concluded in 1985 and 2005 by the two governments. The main author of this uprooting act is no other than Sam Rainsy, an opposition MP, and the charge was leveled by a prosecutor for the Svay Rieng provincial court. This charge was later repeated by the minister of Justice who, in light of the “dangerous” offense, immediately requested the lifting of Sam Rainsy’s parliamentary immunity so that he can be brought to face trial. The entire immunity lifting process took only 10 minutes during a closed door session of the National Assembly controlled by MPs from Hun Sen’s own CPP party.

Regarding the so-called destruction of public properties

What “public properties?” The bits of stakes involved were planted in the middle of rice fields belonging to several generations of Khmer villagers, i.e. on private properties that the government, by allowing these villagers to farm them, is de facto recognizing them as such up until now. Since the very first day of the arbitrary planting of these stakes took place, and in the ensuing days, the owners of these fields had protested and complained to the commune authorities which remained deaf to their plight. The provincial authorities also refused to look into the villagers’ complaints while claiming that it only involves the Phnom Penh government. Therefore, no agreement and no consent were made between the state authorities and the citizen-owners of the lands so that these stakes could be recognized as “public properties”. If there were to be expropriation of these lands for public interest, then no damage compensation was ever paid to the wronged owners, unlike what the Kingdom’s Constitution stipulated. Furthermore, no prior official announcement was ever made for the marking of the border, and the local population in this border commune was never shown with any official geographical map, in spite of the fact that the border delimitation agreements were concluded since 27 December 1985 and completed on 10 October 2005. Governmental authorities also claimed that the staking was only “temporary,” meaning that they could be moved in the future. In summary, on 25 October, these litigious stakes, in spite of them being planted by State agents, could not be qualified as “public properties” and the owners of these rice fields have all the rights to get rid of them if they deem it necessary.

Threat against national security

In a country with the rule of law, elements of the “national security” must be clearly defined so they can be used to evaluate the character and the amplitude of any hypothetical “threat” against such national security. Did the uprooting of these bits of temporary border stakes by Sam Rainsy led to danger for Cambodian lives? Did it risk provoking serious internal troubles, and possibly a civil war, or a war between Cambodia and Vietnam? When MP Sam Rainsy and his colleagues came to look at these marking stakes under the request of protesting villagers, they did not carry anything threatening with them (no knives, no axes and no guns). They simply denounced the “violations of Cambodia’s territorial integrity by Vietnam.” Such a denunciation was legitimate from the part of a parliamentarian – a constitutional representative of the Nation and not just a representative of a political party – who, along with citizens who are directly involved, have always been pushed aside from an in-depth examination of the territorial agreements and from the border demarcation process between their country and the neighboring country. Nowhere else in the world but in Hun Sen’s Cambodia can such government secrecy – a total rebuke to the Parliament right – exists, not even in Vietnam when the latter was involved in border delimitation with China.

At first, the Cambodian authorities did not react to Sam Rainsy’s action in Chantrea simply because there was no need for government intervention urgency to quell any public troubles or any risk of civil war existed. However, five days later, on 30 October, according to Vietnam News Service, Hanoi’s regime “sharply reacted” as it viewed that the uprooting of these stakes by a Cambodian MP as being an “arrogant and irresponsible act violating laws in both countries and the treaties and agreements concluded between the two countries … (and) the slandering statement (made by Sam Rainsy) is aimed at inciting animosity and sabotaging relationships between Vietnam and Cambodia.” VNS added: “the Vietnamese government strongly condemns Sam Rainsy’s acts and declarations and asks that the Cambodian government take due measures to deal with all acts of sabotage in order to assure fine progress in the border demarcation between the two nations”! The veiled sanction threat against Sam Rainsy came from Hanoi which forgot that Sam Rainsy is in fact a Member of Cambodia’s Parliament. It was then that the Svay Rieng provincial prosecutor and Phnom Penh’s minister of Justice initiated their judicial process in which they claim that the case is “highly dangerous for national security” and they demanded for an immediate lifting of the parliamentary immunity of the “arrogant saboteur.”

The fundamental question remains the following: is the Svay Rieng provincial court competent enough to be involved in the case? Can it render judgment on a destruction of “public properties” charge that is not even the case? Can it be competent enough to be involved in a border demarcation problem that involves international law? But, in Cambodia, there is no doubt that Mr. Hun Sen and his comrades can do anything, they are competent in everything, and everything always involves “public order” or “national security.” Let’s recall also that, under Pol Pot, to the eyes of the Kammaphibal (party cadres), any sight of protest, discontent or sadness by an individual is an attack on their Revolution, i.e., their “public order”. Such action can be sanctioned through physical elimination of the individual involved. Thus, it looks like Pol Pot’s lesson did not get lost among his disciples. Sam Rainsy’s trial will thus take place: the benign wooden stakes in Chantrea have been blown up into peace (or war) symbols between Cambodia and Vietnam. It’s an aberration, but this gives the proper perspective on the importance of Hanoi’s domination over the Hun Sen/CPP regime.

Paris, 23 November 2009

Cambodia’s Borders Committee in France and Worldwide

(Signed) Dy Kareth, Vice-President
--------

Frontière Cambodge-Vietnam : le Procès

Que vaut l’arrachage de quelques bouts de pieux de bois plantés dans la boue d’une rizière? – L’accusation contre son auteur de « crimes de destruction de biens publics et de menace contre la sécurité nationale ». Non, ce n’est pas une mauvaise fiction. C’est une réalité qui reflète l’image du régime Hun Sen du Cambodge actuel.

Car il se trouve que ces bouts de pieux représentent le marquage provisoire des bornes de frontière entre le Vietnam et le Cambodge, dans un village cambodgien de Chantrea, de la province de Svay Rieng. Le marquage était fait par des techniciens de la Commission mixte gouvernementale viêtnamo-cambodgiennne, à la suite de la reconnaissance officielle des traités territoriaux - illégaux - de 1985 et de 2005 par les deux Gouvernements. L’auteur principal de cet arrachage est Sam Rainsy, un député de l’Opposition, et l’accusation est décrétée par un procureur d’un tribunal provincial de Svay Rieng, reprise ensuite par le ministre de la Justice, lequel, au vu de la « dangerosité » de l’acte incriminé, demande immédiatement la levée de l’immunité parlementaire du député pour que ce dernier soit mis en examen et jugé. A l’Assemblée nationale, où dominent les membres du parti PPC de Hun Sen, la chose est faite, à huis clos, en dix minutes.

La destruction de biens publics

De quel « bien public » ? Les bouts de pieux en question sont plantés dans des portions de rizières appartenant à des villageois khmers depuis plusieurs générations, c’est-à-dire dans des propriétés privées - que les autorités gouvernementales, qui leur laissent l’exploitation, ont reconnu de facto jusqu’à maintenant. Dès le premier jour de la plantation autoritaire de ces pieux, et les jours suivants, les propriétaires des terrains ont protesté et porté plainte aux autorités de la commune qui font la sourde oreille. Les autorités provinciales ont également refusé d’examiner leur plainte, sous le bon prétexte qu’il s’agissait d’un acte (des autorités) du Gouvernement de Phnom-Penh. Il n’y a donc eu aucun accord ni consentement entre ces autorités étatiques et les citoyens propriétaires des terrains pour que ces bouts de pieux soient reconnus comme « biens publics ». S’il s’agissait d’une désappropriation d’intérêt public, il n’y a pas eu de dédommagement compensatoire aux propriétaires lésés, comme le prévoit la Constitution du Royaume. D’ailleurs, il n’y a eu aucune publicité officielle préalable de ce marquage de la frontière, par exemple par la publication à la connaissance des populations d’une carte géographique officielle de cette commune frontalière, alors que l’Accord de délimitation de celle-ci est conclu dès le 27 décembre 1985 et complété le 10 octobre 2005. Et, aux dires des autorités gouvernementales elles-mêmes, ce marquage n’était que « provisoire », sous-entendant qu’il pourrait être déplacé à l’avenir. En somme, au 25 octobre dernier, ces bouts de pieux litigieux, même plantés par des agents de l’Etat, ne peuvent être qualifiés de « biens publics », et les propriétaires des rizières sont bien en droit de s’en débarrasser, s’ils le jugent nécessaire.

La menace contre la sécurité nationale

Dans un pays où les lois existent, les éléments de la « sécurité nationale » doivent être clairement définis, pour que l’on puisse évaluer le caractère et l’ampleur d’une éventuelle « menace » contre elle. L’arrachage de ces bouts de pieux de marquage provisoire de la frontière par Sam Rainsy a-t-il mis en danger la vie du peuple khmer ou risque-t-il de provoquer de graves troubles intérieures, voire une guerre civile, ou une guerre entre le Cambodge et le Vietnam ? Or, le député Sam Rainsy et ses compagnons étaient venus constater ces pieux de marquage à la demande des villageois protestataires et ne portaient avec eux aucun objet menaçant (couteaux, haches ou armes à feu). Ils ont simplement dénoncé les « violations de l’intégrité territoriale du Cambodge par le Vietnam ». Une telle dénonciation était bien légitime de la part d’un membre de l’Assemblée nationale – donc, constitutionnellement, d’un Représentant de la Nation, non pas seulement un représentant d’un parti politique – qui, de même que les citoyens directement intéressés, a toujours été écarté de l’examen approfondi des accords territoriaux et des processus de la démarcation de la frontière entre son pays et le pays voisin. Ce genre de pratiques secrètes du Gouvernement, au mépris du droit du Parlement, n’existe qu’au Cambodge de Hun Sen et nulle part ailleurs, même pas au Vietnam dans ses problèmes de délimitation de sa frontière avec la Chine.

Dans un premier temps, les autorités khmères n’ont pas réagi à l’action de Sam Rainsy à Chantrea : il n’y a pas eu l’urgence d’une intervention gouvernementale pour prévenir des troubles publiques ou les risques de guerre civile. Mais, cinq jours plus tard, le 30 octobre, selon l’agence Vietnam News Service, s’annonce une « vive réaction » du Gouvernement de Hanoi qui a vu en l’arrachage de ces pieux par le député khmer comme un acte « arrogant, irresponsable, violant les lois des deux pays et les traités et accords conclus entre les deux nations... (et) la déclaration calomnieuse (de Sam Rainsy) a pour but d’inciter l’animosité et le sabotage des relations entre le Vietnam et le Cambodge ». Ainsi, lit-on encore, « le Gouvernement vietnamien condamne avec véhémence les actes et les déclarations de Sam Rainsy et demande au Gouvernement cambodgien de prendre des mesures appropriées contre tous actes de sabotage afin d’assurer la bonne marche de la démarcation de la frontières entre les deux pays » ! La menace de sanctions à peine voilée contre Sam Rainsy vient plutôt de Hanoi, qui oublie également que le même Sam Rainsy est un membre du Parlement cambodgien. Mais, c’est alors que le procureur de Svay Rieng et le ministre de la Justice de Phnom-Penh déclenchent leurs machines judiciaires, se saisissent de l’affaire «hautement dangereuse pour la sécurité nationale» et demandent la suspension immédiate de l’immunité parlementaire de l’« arrogant saboteur ».

La question de fond est encore celle-ci : le tribunal de Svay Rieng est-il compétent pour se saisir de l’affaire et juger la destruction d’un « bien public » qui n’en est pas un, et un problème de la démarcation de la frontière qui n’est pas du ressort de la province de Svay Rieng et qui touche au droit international ? Mais, au Cambodge, n’en doutons pas, M. Hun Sen et ses camarades peuvent tout, sont compétents en tout, et tout touche à « l’ordre public » ou à la « sécurité nationale ». Sous Pol Pot, rappelons-le, le moindre signe de protestation, de mécontentement ou même de tristesse d’un individu constituait aux yeux des Kamaphibal (chefs de service) une atteinte à leur Révolution, c’est-à-dire à leur « ordre public », et peut être sanctionné par le massacre de son auteur. La leçon de Pol Pot n’est pas perdue pour ses adeptes. Le procès de Sam Rainsy va donc avoir lieu : les petits pieux de bois de Chantrea sont les hauts symboles de la paix (ou de la guerre) entre le Cambodge et le Vietnam. C’est hallucinant. Mais, cela donne la bonne mesure du poids de la domination de Hanoi sur le régime Hun Sen/PPC.

Paris, le 23 novembre 2009
Le Comité des Frontières du Cambodge
en France et dans le monde.

Dy Kareth, Vice-Président

Immunity Question Hurts Assembly’s Fairness: Expert

By Sok Khemara, VOA Khmer
Washington
27 November 2009

The National Assembly should be a place of justice and fairness, with serious weight given the suspended immunities of its members, a democracy advocate said Thursday.

“What is important is that there should be a place to find right and wrong and what is just in the National Assembly, and if immunity is removed, it should not be done very quickly like this,” said Hang Chhaya, executive director of the Khmer Institute for Democracy, as a guest on “Hello VOA.”

Hang Chhaya was referring to the Nov. 16 suspension of opposition leader Sam Rainsy’s parliamentary immunity, the third opposition suspension this year.

Sam Rainsy is facing charges in Svay Rieng of incitement and destruction of property, after villagers reportedly angered by Vietnamese encroachment allegedly pulled border markets out of the ground in Chantrea district.

Hang Chhaya echoed concerns of US congressman Chris Smith, a Republican from New Jersey, who said this week that such court cases and the removal of parliamentary immunity could hurt democratic debate in the nation’s legislative body.

Callers to “Hello VOA” Thursday showed wide condemnation for the suspension, which occurred with only members of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party present.

“Sam Rainsy is a member of parliament, and he has the right to serve the people,” said a caller named Un.

“What the government has done to strip [his] immunity is a clear threat not only to Sam Rainsy but other MPs,” said a caller named Ma. “That’s not respectful of freedom and people’s confidentiality, because those are representatives of the people.”

Cambodia's Borders Committee focuses on Sam Rainsy's case

26 Nov 2009
By Moeung Tum
Radio Free Asia
Translated from Khmer by Socheata
Click here to read the article in Khmer

The Paris-based Cambodia's Borders Committee (CBC) issued a statement focusing on the accusation leveled against Sam Rainsy for allegedly perpetrating a criminal act in the destruction of public properties, and threatening on the national security.

The statement dated 23 November criticized the charge of destruction of public properties, saying that it is improper because these border stakes are located on top of rice fields belonging to Cambodian farmers, and furthermore, these farmers have protested the installation of these stakes on their fields and the commune and district authorities did not resolve this issue for them. These are private lands, therefore, the owners of the lands have the right to pull them out, however, if the authority confiscates these lands and turn them into public properties, then the authorities did not legally compensate the land owners yet.

Regarding the charge of threatening national security, CBC indicated that, in a country with the rule of law, there must be clear confirmation as to what constitutes national security so that the type and extent of this threat can be estimated.

CBC asked whether, through the uprooting of temporary border posts, Sam Rainsy caused danger to the Cambodian people, or whether he created unrest in the country that could lead to internal warfare or a war between Cambodia and Vietnam? Sam Rainsy and his colleagues visited these posts location under the invitation of protesting villagers, they did not carry any weapons to threaten anybody.

In summary, Dr. Dy Kareth, CBC vice-president, wrote in this statement that the trial of Sam Rainsy will actually take place in the future. CBC indicated that this is a pressure exerted by Hanoi on Hun Xen and the CPP.

As of Thursday, RFA did not yet receive any government reaction to the CBC statement above.