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

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.

 

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER