Combodia-Post

Bou Meng, right, a Cambodian survivor of the S-21 prison during the Khmer Rouge regime, arrives at the U.N.-backed tribunal court hall where Kaing Guek Eav, the prison's former chief, is being tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity, in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2009. Other people unidentified. (AP Photo/Heng Sinith)

Chum Mey, center, a Cambodian survivor of the S-21 prison during the Khmer Rouge regime, walks in front of the U.N.-backed tribunal court hall while Kaing Guek Eav, also known as Duch, the former chief of the Khmer Rouge's notorious prison, now known as Tuol Sleng genocide museum, is being tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity, in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2009. (AP Photo/Heng Sinith)
Cambodian Buddhist nuns line up in front of the U.N.-backed tribunal court hall while Kaing Guek Eav, the former chief of the Khmer Rouge's notorious S-21 prison, is being tries for war crimes and crimes against humanity, in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2009. (AP Photo/Heng Sinith)
Cambodian students line up as Buddhist monks, left, arrive at the U.N.-backed tribunal court hall while Kaing Guek Eav, the former chief of the Khmer Rouge's notorious S-21 prison, is being tries for war crimes and crimes against humanity, in Phnom Penh, Cambodia,

NGOs demanding for an end to corruption (Photo: RFA)
A declaration from the 20 November plenary meeting of the Council of Ministers indicated that PM Hun Xen had decided to set the 11 December Council of Ministers meeting to pass the anti-corruption draft law.

Sorn Chey, the founder of the Khmer Institute for National Development, considers Hun Xen’s decision to pass the anti-corruption draft law by the Council of Minister as another evolution step for this law that has been stalled for so many years already.

Sorn Chey said: “We hope that the recommendations made by the civil societies in the past will be included in the draft law, and we hope that this draft law will be ratified soon.”

Rong Chhun, President of the Cambodia Independent Teachers’ Association (CITA), welcome Hun Xen’s decision to raise this anti-corruption law for its passage by the Council of Ministers, in spite of the fact that, after its ratification, it is not yet known whether it will be efficient or not to handle the corruption issue.

Rong Chhun said: “The anti-corruption [draft] law takes more than a decade-long and it is still not out yet. What we want is for this law to be adopted soon, regardless of how its application will be!”

Yim Sovann, SRP MP and SRP spokesman, said that, as a MP, he will continue following the meaning of the draft law.

Recent report from Transparency International (TI) indicated that corruption in Cambodia has slightly improved over the year before, but it still remains at the bottom rank among very corrupt countries in the world.

Of the 180 countries evaluated by TI, Cambodia, Laos, Tajikistan and Central Africa all rank 158. Furthermore, Cambodia is only better than another country in Asia: Burma which ranks 178.

The anti-corruption law was prepared since 1994.

Opposition officials, civil society organizations and aid donors have insisted on many occasions for the government to introduce this law, and they are all anxiously waiting to see its adoption.

PHNOM PENH - FORMER Khmer Rouge prison chief Duch should get 40 years in prison for his role in the hardline communist regime, a prosecutor told Cambodia's UN-backed war crimes court on Wednesday.

'We submit... that the sentence to be submitted by this trial chamber should be 40 years in prison,' Bill Smith told judges in the prosecution's final arguments.

Duch - whose real name is Kaing Guek Eav - has apologised repeatedly and admitted responsibility for his actions under Pol Pot's brutal communist movement, which killed up to two million Cambodians in the 1970s.

A Cambodian court is scheduled to deliver a ruling in the case against a Thai engineer, who was arrested on an espionage charge, on December 8, a senor Thai Justice Ministry official said Wednesday.

Thai News Agency quoted Thawee Sodsong, deputy permanent secretary for Justice, as saying that the court was scheduled to deliver a ruling on the case against Siwrak Chutipong on December 8.

Thawee arrived at the Suvarnabhumi Airport Wednesday morning after meeting the Cambodian justice minister and Siwarak in Phnom Penh, Thai News Agency said.

Thawee said the Cambodian justice minister promised to ensure that Siwarak would receive justice and he would make arrangement for Siwarak's mother to visit him in the prison.

Thawee said Siwarak was being detained in a 5 x 5 metre cell along with four other suspects.

Phnom Penh - The prosecution at Cambodia's war crimes tribunal called Wednesday for judges to hand down a 40-year jail term to Comrade Duch, the former commander of the Khmer Rouge's most notorious prison known as S-21. Co-prosecutor William Smith said Duch, whose real name is Kaing Guek Eav, was the Khmer Rouge regime's "loyal and dedicated agent" in running S-21, where thousands of people were tortured and executed between 1975 and 1979, and must be punished accordingly.

Despite some cooperation by Duch and his limited acceptance of his responsibility, Smith said the loss and suffering of the victims and their families must be foremost in the judges' minds when considering their sentence.

The prosecution accepted that their proposed 45-year tariff ought to be reduced by five years for time already served by Duch in pre-trial detention.

Duch is 67, so the prosecution's jail demand would effectively translate to life in prison.

"The whole of humanity demands a just and proportionate response to the crimes [committed at S-21]," he said, adding that the court must remember that the lives and dreams of thousands murdered at S-21 had been stolen by Duch.

Sentencing in Duch's trial is due to take place early next year. There is no death penalty in Cambodia, and he faces a maximum punishment of life in prison.

Duch, who appeared in court in a lilac Ralph Lauren shirt and beige trousers, ran the infamous torture and execution centre known as S-21 in Phnom Penh where at least 15,000 people died between 1975-79. Very few inmates survived.

On Tuesday, the national co-prosecutor Chea Leang told the court that far from being the mere functionary he had tried to portray himself as, Duch was in fact the key intelligence operative for the Khmer Rouge as they sought out real and imaginary enemies of the revolution.

"He was the [Khmer Rouge's] trusted man to identify supposed plots against the revolution and to root out enemies," Chea Leang said.

Thousands of people were tortured and killed at S-21. Witnesses at the trial this year have told how some prisoners had their blood entirely drained, while others suffered simulated drowning, electrocution and beatings.

The defence and Duch himself are scheduled to address the court later Wednesday.

On Monday, lawyers for the civil parties, a collection of 90 people who are predominantly relatives of prisoners who were murdered at S-21, presented their closing arguments.

Duch has testified during the 72-day trial that he was simply following orders and had almost no power to help detainees sent to S-21.

Four senior surviving Khmer Rouge leaders are currently in jail and awaiting trial.

The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia between 1975 and 1979 before being forced out of power by neighbouring Vietnam. Around 2 million people died of starvation and disease or were executed under the radical regime.

With his assets seizure trial nearing its end, Thaksin Shinawatra may find himself a drowning man clutching desperately at every last straw.

A judgement against him will certainly quash the pardon-Thaksin petition that his supporters submitted in September, shutting down all avenues for him to escape legal punishment.

This has prompted speculation, or fears to be exact, that his red-shirted supporters could run amok before the court is scheduled to hand down the ruling.

Thaksin needs to protect his Bt76 billion assets, perhaps his last resources as far as the public knows, which have been frozen at the request of the Assets Examination Committee. As the court is expected to read its verdict in mid-December at the earliest, if Thaksin were to have any chance of survival he would need the royal pardon before then. But the pardon seems to be drifting in a long process.

If the fugitive ex-premier is found guilty in his Bt76-billion assets case, which is now before the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders, his chances of staging a comeback to politics would be zero. The curtain would be drawn on him. The court won't allow an appeal unless the defendant can produce new evidence. A portion or even all of his assets will be confiscated depending on the court verdict.

Thaksin will also later face criminal charges for malfeasance and dereliction of duty in violation of Article 157. As he violated the law on many counts he may end up getting sentenced to dozens of years in prison.

On the other hand, if Thaksin is found not guilty in the assets case he may feel relieved. He will have only the two-year jail term for the Ratchadaphisek land purchase to serve. His other cases are still just in court.

Yellow-shirted protest leader Sondhi Limthongkul also once said he would not mind if Thaksin was granted a pardon after he surrendered and came back to Thailand.

As nobody, even the fugitive ex-premier, knows how the assets decision will turn out, Thaksin has no choice but to topple the Democrat-led government by all means before the court concludes the case to pave the way for his return.

Thaksin maybe realises that the court might reach a finding sooner rather than later, so he has no time to prolong his battle. He has to end the game sooner rather than later. After using neighbouring country Cambodia to attack Thailand, leading to a dispute between the two countries, the fugitive ex-premier is now blowing the whistle to his supporters to oust the government. That's why his red-shirted supporters moved their rally up.

The red shirts will now kick off their "showdown rally" on Saturday - a day earlier than planned - in a bid to "bring down" the government as soon as possible. The red-shirt leaders expect one million people to join the protest. They would disperse temporarily on December 2 to make way for ceremonies to mark His Majesty the King's birthday on December 5, and re-gather after that.

One week before the rally, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva got death threats from community radio stations in Chiang Mai, which is Thaksin's political base. Abhisit had scheduled to visit the province next Sunday.

During the Songkran mayhem, the premier almost lost his life when his car was attacked by red-shirted people at the Interior Ministry. Some fear that Thaksin's new battle may repeat history.

It would be no surprise if Thaksin sets off on a "kamikaze" mission and takes the country hostage as he has always done - putting his personal interest before the country's.

WHAT FORMER ASEAN heavyweight leaders Indonesian President Suharto, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed had in common was a passionate belief in the regional grouping and a readiness to defend the Asean identity and values. They did it with valour and stood firm against heavy criticism from non-Asean countries. In short: no kowtowing to external demands without a consensus.

During the first three decades, their unyielding leadership and attitude was the mantra guiding Asean from an obscure regional grouping to an international player. The 13-year Cambodian conflict, for instance, allowed Asean to show its mettle and patience. From 1979-1992, Asean diplomats and representatives roamed the world lobbying for votes at the annual UN deliberations and garnering support for their unwavering efforts to drive out foreign military occupation of Cambodia.

Their joint vision of a united Asean that could resist external pressure and meddling was well-known. At its inception, Asean was perceived as a pawn in the global power plays as part of the broader Cold War. The grouping has continued to show it has a mind of its own - sometimes much to the irritation of their Western allies and friends.

Burma's hard-headed approach throughout the 1990s was the bench mark of such resistance. Asean countered Western pressure not to admit the pariah state as an Asean member because of its horrible human rights violations and political oppression. Both Suharto and Mahathir strongly backed Burma's membership in Asean against growing international opposition. Burma subsequently joined Asean in 1997. They argued that as countries in the region, they were better placed to resolve their problems.

The days of Asean's defiance are gone. New body languages and rhetoric have quickly emerged within the region. Obviously, Asean has benefited by riding piggy-back on rising Asia. Several factors have contributed to these dramatic shifts both outside and inside Asean.

Last year's global economic and financial crisis caused by the West has pushed the role of Asian economies to the forefront in ameliorating the turmoil. The continued growing influence of China and India - both key dialogue partners of Asean - has further strengthened the grouping's international role and position.

Within the regional grouping, the transformation came last December when Asean adopted a charter and transformed itself into a rule-based organisation. Of course, the jury is still out on how effective the organisation can be in years to come as some Asean members have not yet complied with their new obligations and commitments. After 16 years of procrastination, the setting up of the Asean Intergovernment Commission for Human Rights in October indicates the grouping's willingness - in a slow and evolutionary manner - to accept international norms and standards.

At his meeting with Asean leaders two weeks ago in Singapore, US President Barack Obama even endorsed Asean centrality in future attempts to build a new regional architecture. Indeed, Washington's recognition of Asean as a driving force has an overall positive impact on the future US role in Asean and the Asian region as a whole. As a result, a new Asean is emerging that is no longer uptight and defensive.

Watching US-Asean leaders talking about cooperation and coexistence at regional and global levels, one could be optimistic that the grouping has taken a new mode - a willingness for closer cooperation with dialogue partners to resolve common challenges.

Such confidence and trust in Asean has taken more than three decades to evolve. When Asean initiated the dialogue partner system in 1977 it was purely for selfish reasons of augmenting its regional interest through increasing bargaining power, widening marketplace, as well as access to technological know-how and financial assistance.

In the previous two summits in Thailand, Asean as a whole responded and engaged much better with external players. It was more open to new ideas. The members were more willing to listen, as articulated by Prime Minister Abhist Vejjajiva, the Asean chair, to proposals made by Japan and Australia. Unlike past scepticism, Asean is welcoming new approaches that will strengthen its role. In the case of building a regional architecture, Asean is no longer adamantly insisting on the Asean+3 process.

But there is a worrying trend in intra-Asean relations. The Thai-Cambodian dispute, with personalised elements, has already rocked the cradle of Asean's cardinal principle of non-interference and good neighbourliness. Despite the appeal of "maximum restraint" to the conflicting parties and mediation efforts from Asean Secretary General, Dr Surin Pitsuwan, very few Asean members were ready to do so. As Surin put it, the appeal is part of what he described as "effective dynamics" inside Asean as a rule-based organisation.

Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo wrote to him expressing support while Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Gia Khiem has written to Cambodian Foreign Minister Hor Namhong calling for restraint.

Asean has a weak spot when it comes to resolving disputes among members. Within the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, Asean has a High Council for such a purpose but none has used it. They prefer international arbitration. Fortunately, no Asean members have gone to war against each other in the past 42 years. For the time being, Thailand and Cambodia have yet to climb down. Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who was briefed on the situation by Abhisit and Prime Minister Hun Sen in Singapore, has assigned Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa to follow up on the development and determine if Indonesia, on behalf of Asean, can have a role. If the current Thai-Cambodian conflict and boiling nationalism continues unchecked and unresolved, it could lead to large-scale arms clashes that could tarnish Asean at the most pivotal time.

In the near future, Asean leaders must also show it is worthwhile for the dialogue partners to increase their engagements with their headquarters through their permanent offices. The US and China have already decided to open them by early next year. Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, New Zealand and the EU would probably follow suit soon. Other two dozen countries, who already have their ambassadors accredited to Asean, would have to do the same later.

It was quite clear that there is not any clause or any wordings in the MoU that would allow the persons who were behind the original draft an edge in giving advice, which would be of special benefit to the Cambodia side over the Thai side in further negotiations. The next negotiation will be under full control of the new negotiators or the new government which would take control of the negotiation.

MATICHON NEWSPAPER, on November 16, published an article on Dr Kriangsak Kittichaiseri who was one of the members in the Thai team that negotiated the drafting of the Memorandum of Understanding between Thailand and Cambodia on Overlapping Maritime Boundaries.

Both countries claim the areas, which are known to have a sizeable deposits of oil and natural gas.

The details of the MoU were also published alongside the article. Having read the article and the MoU, I blamed myself for being so na๏ve and listening to the words of our Minister of Foreign Affairs on this issue.

My misunderstanding started from the nationalistic emotion as a Thai. The appointment of Police Lt-Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra, who was sentenced for wrongdoing in some cases by a Thai court, to be personal adviser to Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia, was deemed as insulting behaviour by the prime minister of Cambodia towards Thailand and its justice system.

I felt it was an adequate retaliation to protect the nation's dignity when, immediately after the appointment, the Thai government recalled the Thai ambassador. Later on, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Minister of Foreign Affairs Kasit Piromya threatened to revoke the said MoU, with Minister Kasit saying that the revocation was necessary because the MoU was negotiated and signed during Thaksin's administration. It allowed Thaksin to know all the inside story and important clauses in this MoU.

Such comprehension would enable Thaksin to give advice to our disadvantage and directly impact the negotiations between Thailand and Cambodia under the framework of the MoU.

This story line was also disclosed by Dr Panithan Wattanayakorn, deputy secretary-general to the prime minister, which made it more believable. As a Thai who do not want to be taken advantage of by the Cambodian who insulted our dignity, I, of course, concurred that the move to revoke the MoU was intended to protect the interest of Thailand.

Later on, several eminent persons appeared and considerately gave warnings to the government on this matter with good rationale, which shook my original beliefs.

In the end, it was the article by Dr. Kriangsak that made the whole story become clear to me and I realised that I was completely taken in and fooled by Minister Kasit's story, which was a hoax.

It was quite clear that there is not any clause or any wordings in the MoU that would allow the persons who were behind the original draft an edge in giving advice, which would be of special benefit to the Cambodia side over the Thai side in further negotiations. The next negotiation will be under full control of the new negotiators or the new government which would take control of the negotiation.

The outcome of the negotiation in the joint development area with regard to who will be responsible for what, which party would be a developer, which job will be contracted out and to whom, and any commercial conditions, including the proportion of revenue sharing, totally depends on the new government. They would control the negotiation without being bound by any conditions mentioned or even thought of by the Thaksin government in the past.

The outcome of the negotiation in the area that was agreed to be split in various zones or blocs, which party would develop which zone and the percentage of revenue sharing also totally depends on the new government which controls the negotiation. No other person could, therefore, presume in advance using their privilege.

The MoU specified that in order to negotiate further, a joint committee on technical issues must be established, comprising both Thai and Cambodian members.

To my knowledge, such a committee has not yet been established and there is not any instruction or policy from the government to start the negotiation on this matter.

If we want to thwart any chance to make use of the oil and gas supply under the sea in the area that would benefit Cambodia, simply refraining from establishing the joint committee and from any further negotiation would be effective. Otherwise, if we are so troubled that Thaksin could give advice advantageous to Cambodia, we can simply avoid by not appointing the joint committee for further negotiation. I do not see any necessity to revoke this MoU by any means.

Countries which have a joint boundary and overlapping maritime area will be inseparable for thousands of years. A conflict that exists today could, one fine day, disappear. An opportunity to develop the natural resources in the overlapping area would still be ready to be exploited for mutual benefit if we do not allow emotion to take control of ourselves and lead to an unnecessary act of revocation.

However, what upset me most in this circumstance was the fact that our Minister of Foreign Affairs gave false information to the public. This time, it is the information related to the relation with foreign countries, which normally the Ministry of Foreign Affairs would be especially careful and thoroughly cautious about. When our Minister of Foreign Affairs told an untrue story while our counterpart was aware of the fact, the integrity of the Thai government was at stake, not only in the eyes of our counterpart but also in the eyes of other countries in international arena who may well be aware of the content of this MoU.

I think it is still not too late for the government to change its stance on this issue. Do not be too confident that your proposal to revoke the said MoU will be approved by Parliament. MPs in many parties and even those in the Democrats do think of the national interest as the main objective. I do not want to see the government being changed when this proposal is voted down in the Parliament.

Sir,

The article titled “Sam Rainsy slams VN incursions” in the November 20 edition of the Phnom Penh Post, did not reflect the main point I wanted to stress in my November 19 message to the Cambodian people.

When I said, "Prime Minister Hun Sen is currently playing a dangerous game” affecting Cambodia, I was referring not to his "understating the threat posed by Vietnamese territorial encroachments" as you wrote, but to the fact that he is playing with fire while handling Cambodia’s relations with Thailand.

My message reads, "Mr. Hun Sen is using a classical tactic to divert the Khmer people's attention [from other more serious problems] by exacerbating tensions [with Thailand]."

It concludes, "Cambodia should remain neutral in any internal dispute in any other country. Any spillover from the current tension or unrest in Thailand could be very detrimental to Cambodia, [which could be] set ablaze as past experiences have shown when we unnecessarily and unwisely took side in our neighbours' internal disputes."

Between 1975 and 1979, the Khmer Rouge submitted Cambodia to a totalitarian regime that killed more than a million people.

How did the Khmer Rouge come to power?

In the 1960s, ‘Khmer Rouge’ was the name given to followers of the Communist Party of Kampuchea (the name given by the communists of Cambodia to the country). Following the military coup of 1970, they formed an alliance of convenience with the ousted prince. They then threw themselves into an insurgency, and, after five years of civil war, succeeded in capturing Phnom Penh and ousting the military.

What was their ideology?

Most of the movement’s leaders, including Pol Pot, studied for a time in France, where they were very influenced by the French Communist Party. But the Asian context – and the Vietnamese and Chinese examples – also contributed to the forging of their own ideological framework. As in Maoism, the Khmer Rouge made farmers their proletariat. They were also opposed to their Vietnamese neighbours, whom they considered arrogant intellectuals.

What kinds of policies were implemented during the Pol Pot regime?

When he came to power, Pol Pot declared it “Year Zero” for the Democratic Republic of Kampuchea. The Khmer Rouge completely isolated the country. Anyone suspected of being an “intellectual” was tortured and most often executed. Even wearing glasses was considered enough to warrant such treatment. This purging of Cambodian society gradually turned into a hunt for anyone suspected of opposition. In terms of economic policies, the Khmer Rouge abolished its currency and private property and went so far as to empty the cities and force the population into labour camps.

How many people were killed under this totalitarian regime?

According to estimates, between one and 2.5 million Cambodians -- out of 8 million -- died under the Khmer Rouge regime. The University of Hawaii performed a statistical calculation of the number of victims of Pol Pot’s regime. According to the study, 2,400,000 people died between 1970 and 1980. This estimate included deaths caused by famine.

How did the reign of the Khmer Rouge end?

In 1978, tensions between Vietnam and Cambodia turned into all-out war. On January 7, 1979 the Vietnamese captured Phnom Penh. The Khmer Rouge was forced to retreat west, where they continued an insurgency against the government until Pol Pot’s death in 1988. “Democratic Kampuchea” held on to its seat at the United Nations General Assembly until 1993.

Taipei, Nov. 24 (CNA) Taiwan is planning to set up trade offices in Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia, which may signal a breakthrough in the country's bid to participate in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a ruling Kuomintang legislator said Tuesday.

At least one of the offices will be established by the end of the year, according to Justin Chou, a convener of the Legislative Yuan's Foreign and National Defense Committee.

Chou noted that Taiwan had difficulty setting up trade offices in these three countries in the past mainly because of China's obstruction.

However, as Taiwan's relations with China has improved significantly over the past year, ASEAN members are now more willing to develop economic and trade relations with Taiwan, he said.

This shows that it is not impossible for Taiwan to be included in ASEAN in the future, Chou said.

Also, he said, the signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China will encourage ASEAN members to forge free trade agreements (FTAs) with Taiwan. Singapore is likely to be the first ASEAN member to ink an FTA with Taiwan following the establishment of the ECFA, Chou said.

Economic integration between ASEAN and the East Asian economies of China, Japan and South Korea (ASEAN Ten Plus Three) is scheduled to be achieved in 2012.

For fear of being marginalized, Taiwan has been seeking to take part in the integration process and has put forth the concept of "ASEAN Ten Plus Four."

In this photo released by the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Kaing Guek Eav, the former chief of the Khmer Rouge's notorious S-21 prison, now known as Tuol Sleng genocide museum, is seen in the courtroom of the U.N.-backed tribunal, in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2009. Also known as Duch, Kaing Guek Eav is charged with crimes against humanity, war crimes, murder and torture, and is the first of five defendants scheduled for long-delayed trials by the tribunal. (AP Photo/Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia)

Civil party lawyers say Duch has habitually misled tribunal.

JUDGES should not be fooled by the partial confessions and feigned contrition Kaing Guek Eav, alias Duch, has employed in a bid to downplay the savage crimes he committed as Tuol Sleng prison commandant, civil party lawyers argued Monday during the first round of closing statements in the Khmer Rouge tribunal’s first case.

Four groups of lawyers representing 90 civil parties spent the day attacking claims that have been central to Duch’s defence strategy – that he had no choice but to follow the orders of top Khmer Rouge leaders, for example, and that he did not participate directly in interrogations, torture and executions.

“Your honours must objectively, we say, review the evidence to determine whether or not what has been accepted by the accused amounts to full disclosure and the full truth,” said lawyer Karim Khan.

Kong Pisey, a lawyer for Civil Parties Group 2, told the court that his clients viewed Duch’s repeated professions of remorse as contrived. “His attempts at forging remorse by crying, often around 4pm at the end of the hearing, can be described as crocodile tears. The civil parties felt that the tears were orchestrated and devoid of meaning.”

Lawyers also took issue with the more theatrical performances of Duch and his defence lawyers. Khan highlighted an exchange on September 16 in which international defence lawyer Francois Roux asked Duch whether civil parties could visit him in prison, and whether he would “open the door of your soul” to them. Duch responded that they could, and that he would.

“That kind of answer to that kind of question must be given either little probative value, or at the very least, it must be approached with the utmost caution,” Khan said.

Later, lawyer Philippe Canonne criticised references made by Duch and Roux to “The Death of the Wolf”, a poem by Alfred de Vigny that Duch has said helped him through his time as prison chief. Duch has highlighted, in particular, lines that read: “Shoulder your long and energetic task, / The way that Destiny sees fit to ask, / Then suffer and so die without complaint.”

Addressing Duch directly, Canonne questioned the relevance of the poem to the proceedings.

“We are not here in a trial dealing with elegancy,” he said. “We are not here in a literary discussion. I am speaking to you about the 12,000 people who died in Tuol Sleng.”

Trying ‘to bluff this court’

Khan said the clearest example of Duch’s refusal to come clean during the trial came on June 22, when he described instructions he provided for the torture of Khmer Rouge leader Ney Saran, alias Ya, in 1976.

In a letter dated October 1, 1976, Duch encouraged interrogator Tang Sin Hean, alias Pon, to step up the intensity of Ya’s torture sessions, writing: “Although it may lead to death, comrade is not acting against Angkar’s regulations.”

Duch told the court in June that the message had merely been a ploy to frighten Ya into confessing to crimes committed against the regime.
But Khan contested that assertion.

“This was not a strategy to bluff a detainee,” Khan said. “This is a strategy of the detainee to try to bluff this court.”

Khan also disputed Duch’s claim that to have had little control the operation of Tuol Sleng, calling it inconsistent with the defendant’s own testimony.

He referred to hearings in June, during which Duch described his ability to save artists from execution as well as his establishment of the killing fields at Cheoung Ek.

“He didn’t require consultation for these not-insignificant decisions. He did it under his own volition,” he said. “What happened to this autonomy?

Where did it dissolve? Where did it evaporate when it came to the interrogations, the torture and the killing of so many people?”

Kong Pisey called Duch’s cooperation with the court “neither sincere nor truthful”, highlighting, in particular, his responses to allegations of sexual violence at Tuol Sleng.

Though Duch acknowledged in June that a schoolteacher imprisoned at Tuol Sleng had been raped with a stick, he said he knew of no other such incidents.

Kong Pisey said Duch should be held “criminally liable for at least three rapes” that were mentioned during the hearings.

“The accused had sufficient reason to know that the male interrogators and guards who were deprived of a sexual life would be more likely to exploit the defenceless situation of the women prisoners,” he said.

Reparations

Several lawyers emphasised that their clients were not looking for revenge, and they elaborated on the types of reparations they were seeking as well as how they should be financed.

Kong Pisey said Duch’s self-described indigence was was no excuse for him to “sit back and relax”, and suggested that he instead spend his years in prison writing his autobiography, the proceeds of which could go towards reparations.

The four groups of civil party lawyers submitted a joint filing in September requesting, among other things, free medical care and the building of memorial pagodas as part of a reparations award. The Trial Chamber is likely to rule on reparations when it issues a verdict, which is expected early next year.

Chamroeun Theam has pleaded not guilty to operating under the influence and other charges. Police say he plowed his car into a mother and two children as they crossed a Lowell street. (David H. Brow/ Lowell Sun via Associated Press)
Kin say DUI suspect survived Cambodia terror

LOWELL - A bruised and frightened 4-year-old boy sought comfort yesterday in the arms of his grandmother, who held him close 12 hours after an alleged drunk driver plowed into a double stroller carrying him and his younger sister as they were being pushed in a crosswalk.

The boy, Jonathan Dickie Jr., suffered the most serious injuries when his family was hit by the car, but he has been released from the hospital, as were his mother and sister.

“He could have been dead,’’ said the grandmother, Carol Dickie, as she held him outside her house in Lowell. “I am so glad that the Lord was watching over him. I believe someone up there pushed him out of the way and made sure nothing happened to him, because he could have been dead.’’

The mother, Nina Wilkin, 25, was crossing Fletcher Street about 5:30 p.m. on Sunday with Jonathan and his sister, Katelyn, 2. Two police officers, who were stopped at a red light, saw a car being driven by Chamroeun Theam plow into the family, authorities said.

The boy was knocked out of his stroller, and his mother and sister were knocked to the ground. All three were rushed to Lowell General Hospital.

With the help of a Cambodian interpreter, Theam pleaded not guilty to operating under the influence, second offense operating while under the influence, causing serious injury, and other charges. Judge Neil J. Walker set bail at $5,000 cash.

With tears in their eyes, two of Theam’s daughters and a daughter-in-law watched the court proceeding. Afterward, they spoke with reporters and said Theam has refused entreaties to get help for depression.

They said he grew up in Cambodia, survived the terror years of the Khmer Rouge in the 1970s, and remains haunted by that experience and often has nightmares.

“He needs help,’’ said Sochann Chea, his daughter-in-law. “He doesn’t want it.’’

Chea said the driver’s extended family is concerned for the health of the mother and her two children. Chea said Theam’s family - he has three sons and two daughters - does not want to see him driving any time soon.

“We don’t want anything like this to happen again,’’ Chea said. “We feel very bad, and we hope the family is OK.’’

In a report filed in court, Lowell police officers who witnessed the crash said Wilkin was in the crosswalk and was hurrying to get across Fletcher Street when the light turned green.

Although the family was still in the intersection, police said in the report, Theam accelerated and drove his Dodge Neon directly into them without slowing.

Police said the car struck Nina Wilkin, “throwing her into the air over the windshield, hitting the ground on the other side of the street.’’

The car struck the double stroller, police said, causing the boy to be “ejected out of the stroller and onto the Neon, bouncing off the Neon and onto the pavement.’’

Theam’s blood alcohol level was 0.26 according to the police report. The legal limit is 0.08. Police said he failed other sobriety tests. Citing him as an immediate threat to public safety, the Registry of Motor Vehicles revoked his license following the crash.

“He appeared to be completely unconcerned about what was going on around him,’’ Officer Neils Henry Christiansen wrote of Theam. “He sat in his motor vehicle talking to himself and yelling at no one in particular.’’

Theam was convicted of drunken driving in 1994 in Wisconsin, according to Lowell police. Details of that case were not immediately available.

He also has had two crashes and has been cited at least five times for driving violations since the 1994 drunken driving case, according to the Registry. He is due back in court Dec. 18.

Prosecutors in a UN-backed genocide trial in Cambodia have called for a lengthy jail term for a former Khmer Rouge official.

The defendant, Kaing Guek Eav, also known as Duch, was a senior prison chief during the Khmer Rouge's brutal rule over Cambodia between 1975 and 1979.

He is accused of overseeing the torture and execution of about 16,000 men, women and children at the regime's the S-21 prison, housed in a former high school in the capital, Phnom Penh.

With the nine-month trial entering its final stages on Tuesday, prosecutors have begun wrapping up their case, labelling Duch "the personification of ruthless efficiency" and the "perfect candidate" to run the regime's main torture centre.

Duch has been charged with crimes against humanity, war crimes, torture and premeditated murder, and faces a maximum term of life in prison.

The tribunal does not have the power to impose the death penalty.

A verdict is expected early next year.

"It does not matter that others may not admit their guilt or fail to cooperate with authorities," prosecutor Chea Leang told the court.

"It is simply inconceivable that anything other than a lengthy sentence of imprisonment should be imposed on him."

'Unique role'

She said Duch held a unique, central role in the Khmer Rouge security apparatus and called on judges to reject defence suggestions he was a scapegoat for a regime which had a network of some 200 prisons across Cambodia.

Up to two million people died during the Khmer Rouge's four years in power, wiping out nearly a quarter of Cambodia's population through starvation, overwork and execution.

Since proceedings began in February, Duch, 67, has repeatedly asked for forgiveness, and also argued that he was not a leading figure in the regime saying that he acted out of fear for his own safety and that of his family.

Duch has been detained since 1999, when he was found working as a Christian aid worker in jungles of Cambodia.

The UN-backed court was established in 2006 to try leading members of the regime on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The Duch case is its first trial.

But the tribunal has faced controversy over allegations of interference by the government and claims that Cambodian staff paid bribes for their positions at the court.

The joint trial of four other more senior Khmer Rouge leaders is expected to start in sometime after the verdict in the Duch case is handed down in the new year.

The court is also investigating whether to press charges against five other former Khmer Rouge cadres amid a dispute between international and Cambodian co-prosecutors over whether to pursue more suspects.