Home / News / Urgent Appeals / CAMBODIA: One year anniversary of Cheam Channy's illegal imprisonment
 

CAMBODIA: One year anniversary of Cheam Channy's illegal imprisonment

February 1, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

1 February 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-046-2006: CAMBODIA: One year anniversary of Cheam Channy’s illegal imprisonment

CAMBODIA: Imprisonment; Constitutional rights; Democracy; Rule of law
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) takes the opportunity of the first anniversary of Cheam Channy’s imprisonment to write to you regarding the injustices of this case. Cheam Channy, a MP from the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP), will complete one year in jail on 3 February 2006, out of the seven year sentence passed against him on the basis of fabricated charges. His alleged crime was “an offence against the order of the Co- Commander-In-Chief of the Cambodian Armed Forces, an offence of conspiracy to create an armed group for organised crime, and an offence of fraud”. These offences were later dubbed as “organising an illegal army”.

However, these offences were groundless given that Cheam Channy had simply been performing his duty as chair of the SRP Committee No. 14. This committee was an opposition “shadow ministry”. It was assigned the task to monitor the performance of government ministries covering national defense, veterans’ affairs, demobilisation and public security.

His prosecution by the Military Court of the country was also illegal since this court had no jurisdiction over the case of Cheam Channy, who is a civilian. It has jurisdiction over “military offences” only, and “military offences are those involving military personnel” according to Article 11 on the Military Tribunals of the UNTAC Law of 1992.

Furthermore, on 19 October 2004, the “Military Prosecutor” requested the “lifting of immunity” for the purpose of “making an accusation” only. But, on 3 February 2005, in a closed-door plenary debate, the National Assembly deliberated to lift the whole immunity. It took no preliminary action to ensure that the accusation had been well founded.

However, this lifting of immunity was unconstitutional. In the Constitution of Cambodia or the rules of procedure of the National Assembly there is no such phrase as the “lifting of immunity”, and there is no provision for the lifting of the whole parliamentary immunity either. In fact the Constitution, in Article 80, paragraph 3, stipulates that the National Assembly may give its “authorisation” for “the accusation, arrest, police custody or detention of any Member of the National Assembly” (emphasis added).

The National Assembly may authorise either (1) an accusation, (2) an arrest, (3) a police custody, or (4) a detention; or (5) a combination of these actions, or (6) all of these actions together at the same time, that is, accusation, arrest, police custody, and detention. It should have authorised the accusation as requested first, and when it was satisfied that the court had a case, it could authorise further actions when requested.

Moreover, when the case was tried on 9 August Cheam Channy's defense team was neither allowed to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses nor produce its own witnesses. It was simply a show trial. Cheam Channy was then sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment.

The arrest, deprivation of parliamentary immunity and final sentencing of Cheam Channy is an attempt to maintain a psychosis of intense fear and to erase the possibility of opposition politics in Cambodia.  While the 1993Constitution introduced liberal democracy to Cambodia, the 1997 coup was the beginning of a period of trying to outlaw liberal democracy and to maintain the grip of one single party with only a façade of democracy.  Since then repression has increased significantly and now the attempt is to suppress the democratic opposition altogether.

Some time after the imprisonment of Cheam Channy, the leader of his party, who has left Cambodia himself for fear of arrest, was sentenced in absentia to 18 months imprisonment, also on fabricated charges.  Later several persons including the well known human rights activist Kem Sokha, was arrested on alleged criminal defamation charges.  Under heavy local and international pressure the Prime Minister announced that he would drop the charges against them. However, shortly after he stated that the charges would in fact be pursued.

In a country where there is no independence of the judiciary this trend of arrest and imprisonment of persons purely for political reasons raises the possibilities of the return to the days before Cambodia’s Constitution was adopted in 1993.  Behind all this is the attempt to suppress the Cambodian people themselves who after suffering incomparable repression for many decades want greater freedom and a better life.

There was a complete miscarriage of justice in imprisoning Cheam Channy. His sentencing violated both Cambodian and international law and Cheam Channy’s own rights and freedoms. His imprisonment, therefore, should not be allowed to continue further.

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) strongly urges the Cambodian government, courts and parliament to immediately end Cheam Channy’s imprisonment and to restore his parliamentary immunity. The AHRC also urges the international community to take up this case more strongly and to ensure his release.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission
_______________________________


Suggested Action:

Please write letters to the Prime Minister of Cambodia and the UN Commissioner for Human Rights regarding this matter.

Dear _________________,

Cambodia: The Anniversary of the imprisonment of Cheam Channy – Member of Parliament

I write to draw your attention to the unjust imprisonment of Cheam Channy, a MP from the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP), Cambodia and request your kind intervention for the release of this political prisoner.  All international agencies, including UN agencies, which have looked into this case, have expressed their serious concern about this imprisonment. Imprisoning a member of parliament based on fabricated charges is a clear violation of the liberal democratic constitution of 1993, and is a sad indictment on Cambodia’s justice system.

Cambodia has a tragic recent history where its people’s rights and freedoms were completely denied. I fervently hope that Cambodia will grow into a vigorous democracy so that its disturbing past may be erased for ever.  However, the imprisonment of Mr. Cheam Channy has sadly disturbed my own conscience and also the conscience of millions of people throughout the world who wish to see happiness and freedom restored to Cambodia’s people.  I earnestly urge you to take steps to release Mr Cheam Channy so as to restore confidence in the constitution of 1993 by the Cambodians themselves and the international community at large. 

Yours sincerely,

---------------------------

PLEASE SEND LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Samdech Hun Sen
Prime Minister
Office of the Council of Ministers
Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Fax: + 855 23 426 054

2. Ms. Louise Arbour
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
Fax: +41 22 917 9012/0213

PLEASE SEND A COPY OF THE LETTER TO:

1. His Majesty Norodom Sihamoni
King of the Kingdom of Cambodia
Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy
Royal Palace
Phnom Penh
Cambodia.

2. His Royal Highness Norodom Ranariddh
President
National Assembly
Phnom Penh
Cambodia

3. Samdech Chea Sim
President
The Senate
Phnom Penh
Cambodia

4. His Excellency Ang Vong Vattana
Minister of Justice
Member of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy
Ministry of Justice
Phnom Penh
Cambodia

5. His Excellency Dith Monty
President of the Supreme Court
Member of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy
Supreme Court
Phnom Penh
Cambodia

6. Her Excellency Ly Vuoch Leng
President of the Appeal Court
Member of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy
Appeal Court
Phnom Penh
Cambodia

7. His Excellency Ouk Vithun
Prosecutor General of the Supreme Court
Member of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy
Phnom Penh
Cambodia

8. His Excellency Henro Raken
Prosecutor General of the Appeal Court
Member of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy
Appeal Court
Phnom Penh
Cambodia


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission 

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-046-2006
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.