Cambodia: Opposition Politicians Convicted in Mass Trial

[techietraveller84]

This is from Human Rights Watch, which can sometimes be sensationalist. Can I get more light on the situation? This seems very corrupt. From what the article is saying the accusations are what opposing political parties are always trying to do to each other. It is if the actions are taken through legal means or not. It also seems to things that are being discussed, not actual actions taken.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/17/cam ... mass-trial

A Cambodian court convicted 20 opposition politicians and activists on March 17, 2022, after an unfair trial in which no credible evidence was brought against the defendants, Human Rights Watch said today. The trial appears to have been aimed at sidelining political opponents of Prime Minister HE and the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP).

The Phnom Penh Municipal Court sentenced 20 senior and local members of the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), plus one defendant’s relative, to between five and ten years in prison. Seven people currently abroad were tried and convicted in absentia and sentenced to the ten-year prison sentences based on three counts of unsubstantiated charges of “incitement,” “inciting military personnel to disobedience,” and “conspiracy.”

“The mass trial and convictions of political opponents on baseless charges is a witch hunt that discredits both the Cambodian government and the country’s courts,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Foreign governments, the United Nations, and donors should call out this attack on the political opposition and Cambodia’s remaining vestiges of democracy.”

Authorities have held twelve of the convicted opposition politicians in pretrial detention at Phnom Penh’s Correctional Center 1 (CC1) for up to two years, and released one other politician on bail due to health reasons. The twelve detained opposition members were sentenced to five years in prison based on “incitement” and “conspiracy” charges. They will be required to serve three years and eight months in prison, with the remainder of the sentences suspended. The sentence for the opposition member on bail will be fully suspended. The charges against the 20 referenced several issues, including the formation of the overseas opposition Cambodia National Rescue Movement (CNRM) in 2018, and social media comments criticizing the government.

On February 24, the Phnom Penh court concluded the last trial hearing in the case against the defendants. They are former CNRP leader Sam Rainsy, Eng Chai Eang, Ho Vann, Mu Sochua, Nut Romduol, Tioulong Saumura, Tok Vanchan, Long Phary, Khut Chroek, Ngin Khean, Yim Sareth, Kheum Pheana, Thai Sokunthea, Keo Thai, Nhem Vean, Chum Chan, Sok Chantha, Pheat Mab, Sun Thun, and Hin Chhan. The defendant Chhon Bunchhat is Hin Chhan’s cousin and not a CNRP member. The prosecutor sought and obtained arrest warrants against the opposition leaders abroad, including Sam Rainsy, Eng Chai Eang, and Mu Sochua.

During the trial, the prosecutor argued that the defendants conspired to topple the government, pointing to the planned return by the exiled CNRP leadership to Cambodia in November 2019. He accused the group, without basis, of being part of a “secret network” that sought to disrupt Cambodia’s economy, encourage the military to disobey the government, and use the Covid-19 pandemic to undermine the government’s credibility, thereby causing uprisings.

The prosecutor claimed that the group was responsible for causing the partial suspension of the European Union’s “Everything But Arms” (EBA) trade preferences in August 2020. The EU Commission found that Cambodia violated the agreement’s underlying core international human rights and labor rights treaties, in particular through serious violations of civil and political rights.

Since the government intensified its crackdown on the political opposition after the ruling-party-controlled Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP in November 2017, many activists fled the country because they feared arbitrary arrest or other forms of retaliation against them and their families.

In 2021, Cambodian authorities prosecuted hundreds of people based on their political affiliation, for peaceful activism, or for exercising their free speech rights. The trial of the 20 politicians and activists is the first of what is expected to be further mass trials in the coming months. The authorities have also repeatedly delayed the trial of Kem Sokha, the CNRP leader, on unsubstantiated, politically motivated treason charges brought in September 2017. His trial only recommenced in mid-January 2022.

After exiled CNRP leaders announced that they would return to Cambodia in November 2019, the authorities arrested at least 125 former CNRP members and activists inside the country. At least 78 faced politically motivated charges. While all but four of them were released on bail in December 2019, the bogus charges were never dropped, and the activists remain subject to re-arrest.

Human Rights Watch has documented that more than 60 political prisoners are in pretrial detention or prison in Cambodia, including members of the political opposition, community activists, and trade unionists.

Members and observer states at the UN Human Rights Council should strongly condemn Cambodia’s mass political trials and other serious rights violations at the upcoming session addressing the human rights situation in Cambodia on March 29, Human Rights Watch said.

“Cambodia’s politicized courts have facilitated Prime Minister HE’s effort to destroy the last remnants of democratic freedoms and civil and political rights in the country,” Robertson said. “Concerned governments should do all they can to reverse this assault on the Cambodian people.”

[Kuroneko]

This is from Human Rights Watch, which can sometimes be sensationalist. Can I get more light on the situation? This seems very corrupt. From what the article is saying the accusations are what opposing political parties are always trying to do to each other. It is if the actions are taken through legal means or not. It also seems to things that are being discussed, not actual actions taken.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/17/cam ... mass-trial

A Cambodian court convicted 20 opposition politicians and activists on March 17, 2022, after an unfair trial in which no credible evidence was brought against the defendants, Human Rights Watch said today. The trial appears to have been aimed at sidelining political opponents of Prime Minister HE and the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP).

The Phnom Penh Municipal Court sentenced 20 senior and local members of the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), plus one defendant’s relative, to between five and ten years in prison. Seven people currently abroad were tried and convicted in absentia and sentenced to the ten-year prison sentences based on three counts of unsubstantiated charges of “incitement,” “inciting military personnel to disobedience,” and “conspiracy.”

“The mass trial and convictions of political opponents on baseless charges is a witch hunt that discredits both the Cambodian government and the country’s courts,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Foreign governments, the United Nations, and donors should call out this attack on the political opposition and Cambodia’s remaining vestiges of democracy.”

Authorities have held twelve of the convicted opposition politicians in pretrial detention at Phnom Penh’s Correctional Center 1 (CC1) for up to two years, and released one other politician on bail due to health reasons. The twelve detained opposition members were sentenced to five years in prison based on “incitement” and “conspiracy” charges. They will be required to serve three years and eight months in prison, with the remainder of the sentences suspended. The sentence for the opposition member on bail will be fully suspended. The charges against the 20 referenced several issues, including the formation of the overseas opposition Cambodia National Rescue Movement (CNRM) in 2018, and social media comments criticizing the government.

On February 24, the Phnom Penh court concluded the last trial hearing in the case against the defendants. They are former CNRP leader Sam Rainsy, Eng Chai Eang, Ho Vann, Mu Sochua, Nut Romduol, Tioulong Saumura, Tok Vanchan, Long Phary, Khut Chroek, Ngin Khean, Yim Sareth, Kheum Pheana, Thai Sokunthea, Keo Thai, Nhem Vean, Chum Chan, Sok Chantha, Pheat Mab, Sun Thun, and Hin Chhan. The defendant Chhon Bunchhat is Hin Chhan’s cousin and not a CNRP member. The prosecutor sought and obtained arrest warrants against the opposition leaders abroad, including Sam Rainsy, Eng Chai Eang, and Mu Sochua.

During the trial, the prosecutor argued that the defendants conspired to topple the government, pointing to the planned return by the exiled CNRP leadership to Cambodia in November 2019. He accused the group, without basis, of being part of a “secret network” that sought to disrupt Cambodia’s economy, encourage the military to disobey the government, and use the Covid-19 pandemic to undermine the government’s credibility, thereby causing uprisings.

The prosecutor claimed that the group was responsible for causing the partial suspension of the European Union’s “Everything But Arms” (EBA) trade preferences in August 2020. The EU Commission found that Cambodia violated the agreement’s underlying core international human rights and labor rights treaties, in particular through serious violations of civil and political rights.

Since the government intensified its crackdown on the political opposition after the ruling-party-controlled Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP in November 2017, many activists fled the country because they feared arbitrary arrest or other forms of retaliation against them and their families.

In 2021, Cambodian authorities prosecuted hundreds of people based on their political affiliation, for peaceful activism, or for exercising their free speech rights. The trial of the 20 politicians and activists is the first of what is expected to be further mass trials in the coming months. The authorities have also repeatedly delayed the trial of Kem Sokha, the CNRP leader, on unsubstantiated, politically motivated treason charges brought in September 2017. His trial only recommenced in mid-January 2022.

After exiled CNRP leaders announced that they would return to Cambodia in November 2019, the authorities arrested at least 125 former CNRP members and activists inside the country. At least 78 faced politically motivated charges. While all but four of them were released on bail in December 2019, the bogus charges were never dropped, and the activists remain subject to re-arrest.

Human Rights Watch has documented that more than 60 political prisoners are in pretrial detention or prison in Cambodia, including members of the political opposition, community activists, and trade unionists.

Members and observer states at the UN Human Rights Council should strongly condemn Cambodia’s mass political trials and other serious rights violations at the upcoming session addressing the human rights situation in Cambodia on March 29, Human Rights Watch said.

“Cambodia’s politicized courts have facilitated Prime Minister HE’s effort to destroy the last remnants of democratic freedoms and civil and political rights in the country,” Robertson said. “Concerned governments should do all they can to reverse this assault on the Cambodian people.”

Re HRW and their focus on framing the CNRP and Sam Rainsy as a human rights issue, a copy of my response to a the thread: 30 years on, has anything gotten better? Paris Peace Agreements.

by Kuroneko » Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:32 am post518232.html#p518232

John Bingham wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:00 am

The Vietnamese withdrew in 1989, 2 years before these Paris Peace Agreements. The agrrements are often lauded as "bringing peace" to Cambodia. They certainly did a lot to bring peace by bringing the ANS (FUNCINPEC Royalist Army) and KPNLF (Nationalist army composed of former Lon Nol supporters/ Republicans) into the fold. Not that those alliances always lasted long. The war with the so-called Khmer Rouge expanded after the UN left and didn't end till the late 90s. The UN and international community like to claim Cambodia as a success story, in reality if it wasn't for the boss and his win win policy the place would still be in ruins.

by Kuroneko » Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:32 am post518232.html#p518232
Exactly right! I am starting to think the op is either trolling with that article or working on supporting American foreign policy against Cambodia. The focus of many of these articles is framing the eradication of the CNRP and their backers failed attempts at sabotaging the Cambodian Government as a human rights issue. HRW's agenda being a case in point.

"HRW has provoked politically and socially toxic environments through consistently fabricating misleading information and launching groundless attacks against Cambodia since the early 1990s. Truth be told, it fails to recognize the achievements made by the Royal Government of Cambodia in lifting millions of people from poverty. The rights to live and livelihoods are the most important human rights above all. We cannot talk about human rights if the people are hungry, and their livelihoods are under threat.
It is crystal clear that HRW’s core members have had a long history of grudges against Cambodian leaders whom they have accused of violating human rights without presenting credible facts or evidence. Their ambition is to bring down the legitimate government by provoking people’s discontent with and mistrust of the government."

"To understand the nature of HRW, we need to understand its roots. Founded in 1978 during the Cold War, HRW was initially named Helsinki Watch to monitor the former Soviet Union’s implementation of the 1975 Helsinki Accords and to examine and criticize “crimes” committed by the former Soviet Union and its allies, which has led to the long-standing Cold-War ideology carried out by the group under the disguise of a human rights organization. It is founded based on political ideology and propaganda. Clearly, HRW was a by-product of the Cold War whose raison d’etre would have ceased after the Cold War ended."
Relevant paragraphs cut from a KT article illustrating my perspective https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50917270/h ... m-project/

[down_time]

Relevant paragraphs cut from a KT article illustrating my perspective https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50917270/h ... m-project/

The author of that KT article:

Suos Yara
Born 18 November 1973 (age 48)
Suos Yara (Khmer: សួស យ៉ារ៉ា; born 18 November 1973) is a Cambodian politician who serves as a spokesperson for the Cambodian People's Party. He is a member of the National Assembly of Cambodia, representing the Preah Vihear constituency. He also serves as a member the Central Committee of the Cambodian People's Party, and is a vice-chairman of its Commission for External Relations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suos_Yara

This is not a defense of HRW but I'm not sure Sous Yara is going to be writing a balanced critique of the organisation.

[Kuroneko]

Relevant paragraphs cut from a KT article illustrating my perspective https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50917270/h ... m-project/

The author of that KT article:

Suos Yara
Born 18 November 1973 (age 48)
Suos Yara (Khmer: សួស យ៉ារ៉ា; born 18 November 1973) is a Cambodian politician who serves as a spokesperson for the Cambodian People's Party. He is a member of the National Assembly of Cambodia, representing the Preah Vihear constituency. He also serves as a member the Central Committee of the Cambodian People's Party, and is a vice-chairman of its Commission for External Relations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suos_Yara

This is not a defense of HRW but I'm not sure Sous Yara is going to be writing a balanced critique of the organisation.

I know who the authour is and I used his critique of HRW in his article "HRW politicises human rights with a biased report attacking Cambodian dam project" as a fairly succinct critique of the HRW perspective and which I generally concur. I agree that it is a Khmer perspective and provides another view as generally perspectives in Cambodia are generally negative HRW are generally biased toward American Foreign Policy and post accordingly and Sous Yara is providing another perspective. However if there but is anything that you think is incorrect with his article with regard to HRW tell me.

Criticism of Human Rights Watch

The international non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch (HRW) has been the subject of criticism from a number of observers. Critics of HRW include the national governments it has investigated, NGO Monitor, the media, and its founder (and former chairman), Robert L. Bernstein.

The criticism generally falls into the category of alleged bias, frequently in response to critical HRW reports. Bias allegations include the organization's being influenced by United States government policy, particularly in relation to reporting on Yugoslavia, Latin America, and the misrepresentation of human-rights issues in Eritrea and Ethiopia. Accusations in relation to the Arab–Israeli conflict include claims that HRW is biased against Israel. HRW has publicly responded to criticism of its reporting on Latin America and the Arab–Israeli conflict.

Allegations of ideological and selection bias
HRW has been accused of evidence-gathering bias because it is said to be "credulous of civilian witnesses in places like Gaza and Afghanistan" but "skeptical of anyone in a uniform."[1] Its founder, Robert Bernstein, accused the organization of poor research methods and relying on "witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage or because they fear retaliation from their own rulers."[2]

In May 2014 an open letter was published criticising Human Rights Watch for what were described as its close ties to the government of the United States. The letter was signed by Nobel Peace Laureates Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Mairead Corrigan, former UN Assistant Secretary-General Hans von Sponeck, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Richard A. Falk, and over 100 scholars and cultural figures. The letter highlighted a number of Human Rights Watch officials who had been involved in foreign policy roles in the US government, including Washington advocacy director Tom Malinowski, formerly a speechwriter for Madeleine Albright and a special adviser to Bill Clinton, and subsequently Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor to John Kerry, and HRW Americas advisory committee members Myles Frechette (a former United States Ambassador to Colombia) and Michael Shifter (former Latin America director for the US government-funded National Endowment for Democracy). The letter contrasted HRW's criticism of Venezuela's candidacy for the United Nations Human Rights Council in a letter to Hugo Chávez to the lack of censure regarding the United States' tenure as a member of the Council, despite the US government's use of a "kill list" for designated enemies, ongoing usage of extraordinary renditions and the continued detention of combatants at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. The signatories called on Human Rights Watch to ban those involved in formulating or carrying out US foreign policy from serving as members of the organisation's staff, advisers or board members, or as a "bare minimum", instituting lengthy cooling-off periods between spells working for HRW and in the service of US foreign policy.[7]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism ... ghts_Watch

[down_time]

I know who the authour is and I used his critique of HRW in his article "HRW politicises human rights with a biased report attacking Cambodian dam project" as a fairly succinct critique of the HRW perspective and which I generally concur. I agree that it is a Khmer perspective and provides another view as generally perspectives in Cambodia are generally negative HRW are generally biased toward American Foreign Policy and post accordingly and Sous Yara is providing another perspective. However if there but is anything that you think is incorrect with his article with regard to HRW tell me.

Fair enough, I agree about differing perspectives and it's certainly counters the prevailing external narrative of poorly resourced relocation of families in the site of the Lower Sesan 2 dam.

With specific reference to his article I would probably push back on it's second paragraph:

To understand the nature of HRW, we need to understand its roots. Founded in 1978 during the Cold War, HRW was initially named Helsinki Watch to monitor the former Soviet Union’s implementation of the 1975 Helsinki Accords and to examine and criticize “crimes” committed by the former Soviet Union and its allies, which has led to the long-standing Cold-War ideology carried out by the group under the disguise of a human rights organization. It is founded based on political ideology and propaganda. Clearly, HRW was a by-product of the Cold War whose raison d’etre would have ceased after the Cold War ended.

It was certainly formed from Helsinki Watch (1978), which was established to monitor the Helsinki Accords. The rest of the paragraph is simply his opinion masquerading as logical reasoning.

In 1977 the Communist governments in eastern bloc countries such as Ukraine and Poland began violently repressing and arresting local activists for setting up local committees to fight for the rights they had been afforded by the Helsinki Accords. Robert Bernstein a US publisher who had recently visited Russia as part of a delegation from the Association of American Publishers, was approached to help organise an international campaign to free these imprisoned activitists, this led to the founding of Helsinki Watch. This in turn led to the release of leading figures of the early rights movement in the communist bloc such as Adam Michnik in Poland, Vaclav Havel in Czechoslovakia, and Yuri Orlov in the Soviet Union.

So personally I would disagree with Sous Yara characterisation of HRW's founding, his "understanding" of its roots is based on his position within the CPP, and HRW's repeated attacks on his government, which is perfectly understandable given the situation.

Again, this is not a defense of HRW per se, just noting that the the author of the article is making assertions that are not neccessarily an objective reading of history and then using logos to infer that because of this HRW are "fabricating misleading information and launching groundless attacks" against the govt. They may well be but I perceive the specific rhetoric employed here to be a deliberately employed and thinly disguised logical fallacy.

I'm interested in the rebuttal of specific claims made in the HRW report he is writing about. I remember the stories in the paper but I've not really read about it at any length. I may return to the subject later, once I understand more about the situation then and now.