Home / News / Urgent Appeals / CAMBODIA: Justice is traded in Kampot after a police shooting
 

CAMBODIA: Justice is traded in Kampot after a police shooting

September 10, 2009

Khmer


ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION -- URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-117-2009



11 September 2009
------------------------------------------------------
CAMBODIA: Justice is traded in Kampot after a police shooting

ISSUES: Police assault; judicial system
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information about a case in which a policeman shot an drunken farmer in the groin during a house call. The victim and his family have accepted US$1000 from the officer in return for not lodging a criminal case against him. However the use of settlements to bypass criminal procedure in Cambodia is damaging to the country's rule of law, and leaves civilians more vulnerable to abuse.

CASE DETAILS:

According to our sources, 24 year-old farmer, Chey Vannak, was shot by commune policeman Chin Dul on 4 September 2009, while the officer was trying to intervene in a domestic dispute. Vannak was allegedly drunk, threatening his wife and causing damage to his house in Prich village, Kampot province.

The area's police chief, Em Sokha reported that Officer Dul opened fire after Vannak tried to attack him with a long knife (a local tool used to cut banana trees and grass). Vannak is being treated for his injuries at Kampot provincial hospital.

However it must be asked whether the force used by the police officer was in proportion to the threat posed. The victim is badly injured and since there is enough evidence for a case, it must go through the criminal courts and be tried. This is the only way to decide whether the officer should be held accountable. Instead the officer has reportedly offered the victim's family US$1000 to not file a criminal case against him, and the family has reportedly accepted the money.

This is a common way of dealing with crime in Cambodia and as a result, many important cases never make it to the courts. It is widely thought to be a fair way to reconcile a wrong, and indeed this can be true regarding civil damages. But by not following legal procedure in a criminal case, victims leave themselves vulnerable; the terms of their agreement can easily be abused. Victims who do want redress can be pushed into a settlement and those who violate rights can continue, confident that they can buy their way out of trouble.

This case needs to be taken through the courts so that its cause can be investigated. It may be decided that officers in this district need further training so that they can respond to attacks with non-lethal measures.

But also, where extra-judicial settlements are common a culture of impunity and corruption tends to develop. Of all the problems facing Cambodia at the moment, this is the worst. Perpetrators in similar past cases – sometimes police officers – have arranged for criminal charges to be downgraded to civil damages, and this is not acceptable. When officers are not made legally accountable for a crime, the wrong message is sent to the public and those working in the judicial system become demoralised. Justice is not something that can be bought and sold.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the officials below asking them to ensure that Chin Dul is legally tried for the shooting of Chey Vannak, and to make all efforts to end out of court settlements for criminal cases in Cambodia.

To support this appeal please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ____________,

Re: CAMBODIA: Justice is traded in Kampot after a police shooting

Name of the victim:
Chey Vannak, 24; married; a farmer living in Prich village, Boeng Nimol commune, Chhouk district, Kampot province.
Alleged perpetrators:
Chim dul, 45; a commune policeman in Boeng Nimol, Chhouk district, Kampot province.

Date of incident: 4 September, 2009.
Place of incident: Prich village, Boeng Nimol commune, Chhouk district, Kampot province.

I am writing to express my concern about a case in which a policeman shot an aggressive farmer during a house call, but may not face a criminal trial.

I am told that Chey Vannak was shot by commune policeman Chin Dul on 4 September 2009, while the officer was trying to intervene in a domestic dispute. Vannak was allegedly drunk, threatening his wife and causing damage to his house in Prich village. Officer Dul reportedly opened fire after Vannak tried to attack him with a long knife (a local tool used to cut banana trees and grass). Vannak is being treated for his injuries at Kampot provincial hospital.

The first question should be whether the force used by the police officer was in proportion to the threat posed. The victim is badly injured and since there is enough evidence for a case it must go through the criminal courts and be tried. This is the only way to decide whether the officer should be held accountable. But instead the officer has reportedly offered the victim's family US$1000 to not file a criminal case against him. The family has reportedly agreed and accepted it.

This is a common way of dealing with cases in Cambodia and it keeps many from ever reaching the courts. It is widely thought to be a fair form of reconciliation, and indeed it can be with regard to civil damages. But by not following legal procedure in a criminal case, victims leave themselves vulnerable; the terms of their agreement can easily be abused. Victims who do want redress can be pushed into a settlement and those who violate rights can continue, confident that they can buy their way out of trouble.

This case needs to be taken through the courts so that the reasons for its occurrence can be investigated. It may be decided that officers in this district need further training so that they can respond to attacks with non-lethal measures.

I kindly request that you ensure that Officer Dul is legally tried for the shooting of Chey Vannak, and to make all efforts to end out of court settlements for criminal cases in Cambodia. Extra-judicial settlements simply promote a culture of impunity and corruption. When officers are not made legally accountable for a crime, the wrong message is sent to the public and it only serves to demoralize those working in the judicial system. Justice is not something that can be bought and sold.

Your sincerely, 

_______

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Hun Sen
Prime Minister
Cabinet of the Prime Minister
No. 38, Russian Federation Street
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Fax: +855 23 36 0666
Tel: +855 2321 9898
E-mail: cabinet1b@camnet.com.kh

2. Mr. Sar Kheng
Deputy-Prime Minister
Minister of Ministry of Interior
No.275 Norodom Blvd.,
Phnom Penh, CAMBODIA
Fax/phone: +855 23 721905/23 726052/23 721190
E-Mail: info@interior.gov.kh

3. Mr. Ang Vong Vathna
Minister of Justice
No 240, Sothearos Blvd.
Phnom Penh, CAMBODIA
Fax: +855 23 36 4119 / 21 6622
E-mail: moj@cambodia.gov.kh
-----------------------------
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)


 
Related content
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-117-2009
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.