Home / News / Urgent Appeals / CAMBODIA: A journalist convicted for exposing alleged corruption of the deputy prime minister
 

CAMBODIA: A journalist convicted for exposing alleged corruption of the deputy prime minister

September 21, 2006

[NOTICE: The AHRC have developed a new automatic letter-sending system using the "button" below. However, in this appeal, we could not include e-mail addresses of some of the Cambodian authorities. We encourage you to send your appeal letters via fax or post to those people. Fax numbers and postal addresses of the Cambodian authorities are attached below with this appeal. Thank you.]

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

22 September 2006
--------------------------------------------------------
UA-313-2006: CAMBODIA: A journalist convicted for exposing alleged corruption of the deputy prime minister

CAMBODIA: Restriction of free media; abuse of legal system to suppress freedom of expression
---------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Right Commission (AHRC) has received information that Phnom Penh municipal court had convicted Mr. Dum Sith, the editor-in-chief of a Khmer language local newspaper Moneaksekar Khmer for disinformation after it published an article exposing the Deputy Prime Minister Sok An's alleged involvement in corruption. On 15 September 2006, in a trial in absentia, the court fined Dum Sith eight million Riels (US$2000) and ordered him to pay damages of ten million Riels (US$2500) to the government. This is yet another case that the Cambodian government abuses legal system to suppress their objectors. In the recent years, the Cambodian government had filed cases of defamation against several prominent opposition politicians and human rights defenders. 

On 13 June 2006, Moneasekar Khmer newspaper published an article titled "Sok An trading accusations of corruption with party leaders" based on the information given by an unnamed source. The article alleged that Deputy Prime Minister Sok An had had a squabble at a meeting of the permanent committee of his ruling party, the Cambodian People's Party (CPP), held on an unspecified date, when party leaders had accused him of corruption and he had accused of the same in return. The same article alleged that Sok An had been involved in corruption when he had authorised an airline of a foreign country a landing right in Cambodia without securing in return the same right in that foreign country for the then national airline. The article further alleged that investors who were well in with Sok An were prosperous and those who were not invariably went bankrupt.

After the publication, the Cambodian government brought this case to court against the newspaper company. At the trial, both Sok Roeun, the prosecutor, and Long Narin, counsel for the government, accused the newspaper company that the publication had incited rifts between the party and the government. But Dum Sith said in a statement that his newspaper had published the truth.

In the judgment, the trial judge Iv Kim Sry convicted Dum Sith in accordance with Article 62 on disinformation of the Criminal Code of Cambodia. The judge also added that if Dum Sith refused to pay the fine for the damages, he would put him in jail to make him pay the money.

However, the AHRC is concerned that Dum Sith's right to a fair trial has been violated during his trial. That the conviction was made without evidence is beyond reasonable doubt. According to Article 62 of the Criminal Code of Cambodia, there are three constitutive elements that can charge any person with the offence of disinformation; (1) the information must be false, fabricated, falsified or untruthfully attributed to a third person; (2) it must be published, distributed or reproduced in bad faith and with malicious intent; and (3) this publication, distribution or reproduction must have disturbed or is likely to disturb the public peace.

Rifts between the CPP and the government that the prosecutor and the government accused the newspaper article of causing would simply be within the ruling party itself and would not disturb public peace. In fact, other parties have experienced rifts and these rifts have not disturbed the public peace at all. There was nothing to indicate that there was any malice against Sok An. The article simply exposed the corruption of the next powerful government leader after the prime minister. Also at the trial the prosecutor and the government counsel did not even cite these two elements of the offence to charge the accused.

The charge and conviction of Dum Sith by a court which is very much under executive control was meant to silence government critics and protect corruption among the ruling elite. They violate freedom of expression and press freedom, and discourage the press from actively participating in the fight against corruption. They are yet another evidence of the government's lack of sincerity in fulfilling its human rights obligations and in its repeatedly proclaimed fight against corruption.

The AHRC urges the Court of Appeal of Cambodia to uphold Dum Sith's appeal and squashed his conviction.  It also urges the Cambodian government to uphold the rule of law and respect freedom of expression and press freedom. If there is any wrong information in publication, the government should request the newspaper to correct it in the first place before taking it to court. Actually, the government should appreciate the role of the press in the fight against corruption. The AHRC further urges donor governments, UN agencies, international aid agencies and the international human rights community to work with the Cambodian government to put an end to its use of courts to silence its critics and violate freedom of expression and press freedom.

The Cambodian government has been abusing legal system to suppress the objectors or rights groups. For example, the AHRC has recently reported the case of Teang Narith, Law and Politics lecturer at Sihanouk Raj Buddhist University in Phnom Penh, who was dismissed and charged with the criminal offence of disinformation after writing a book critical of the government (UA-281-2006 and UP-176-2006) and the case of three union activists, who were illegally convicted by the Kandal Provincial Court (UA-229-2006 and UP-158-2006).

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the authorities listed below to express your concern about this case and urge them reject Dum Sith's conviction, and to uphold the rule of law and respect freedom of expression and press freedom.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear _________,

CAMBODIA: A journalist convicted for exposing alleged corruption of the deputy prime minister

I am writing to express my deep concern at the conviction of Dum Sith, editor-in-chief of Moneaksekar Khmer newspaper, by Phnom Penh municipal court for disinformation following his publication of an article exposing the involvement of Sok An, a deputy prime minister, in corruption. On September 15, in a trial in absentia, that court fined Dum Sith eight million riels (US$2000) and ordered him to pay damages of ten million riels (US$2500) to the government.

I have learned that on June 13 Moneasekar Khmer newspaper published an article under the title 'Sok An trading accusations of corruption with party leaders' based on the information provided by an unnamed source. The article alleged that Sok An had a squabble at a meeting of the permanent committee of their party, the Cambodian People's Party (CPP), held on an unspecified date, when party leaders had accused him of being corrupt and he had accused them of the same in return. The same article alleged that Sok An had been involved in corruption when he had authorised an airline of a foreign country a landing right in Cambodia without securing in return the same right in that foreign country for the then national airline. It further alleged that investors who were well in with Sok An were prosperous and those who were not invariably went bankrupt.

I have further learned that at the trial both Sok Roeun, the prosecutor, and Long Narin, counsel for the government, charged that the publication had incited rifts between the party and the government. But Dum Sith said in a statement that his newspaper had published the truth. When announcing the judgment, Iv Kim Sry, the trial judge, said Dum Sith was convicted in accordance with Article 62 on disinformation of the Cambodian criminal law.  The judge added that if Dum Sith refused to pay the fine and damages, he would put him in jail to make him pay them.

I don't at all believe that Dum Sith had a fair trial and that there was evidence beyond reasonable doubt to convict him. I understand that according to Article 62 of the same criminal law, there must be three constitutive elements present at the same time to be able to charge any person with the offence of disinformation (1) the information must be false, fabricated, falsified or untruthfully attributed to a third person; (2) it must be published, distributed or reproduced in bad faith and with malicious intent; and (3) this publication, distribution or reproduction must have disturbed or is likely to disturb the public peace.  Rifts between the CPP and the government that the prosecutor and the government accused the newspaper article of causing would simply be within the ruling party itself and would not disturb the public peace. In fact other parties have experienced internal rifts and these rifts have not disturbed the public peace at all. There was nothing to indicate that there was any malice against Sok An. The article simply exposed the corruption of the next powerful government leader after the prime minister. Anyway the prosecutor and the government counsel did not even cite these two elements of the offence to charge the accused.

To me, the charge and conviction of Dum Sith by a court which is widely known to be under executive control was meant to silence government critics and protect corruption among the ruling elite. They have violated freedom of expression and press freedom, and have discouraged the press from actively participating in the fight against corruption. They are yet another evidence of the government's lack of sincerity in fulfilling its human rights obligations and in its repeatedly proclaimed fight against corruption.

I urgently request the Court of Appeal of Cambodia to uphold Dum Sith's appeal and squash his conviction.  I also request the Cambodian government to uphold the rule of law and respect freedom of expression and press freedom.  If there is any wrong information in any publication, the government should request the newspaper to correct it in the first place before taking it to the court. Actually, the government should appreciate the role of the press in the fight against corruption. I further request donor governments, UN agencies, international aid agencies and the international human rights community to work with the Cambodian government to put an end to its use of courts to silence its critics and to violate freedom of expression and press freedom.

Yours truly,


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


PLEASE WRITE YOUR LETTER TO:

1. Mr. Samdech Hun Sen
Prime Minister
Cabinet of the Prime Minister
No.38, Russian Federation Blvd
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Tel: +855-23-21 98 98
Fax: +855-23-36 06 66
E-mail: cabinet1b@camnet.com.kh

2. Mr. Sar Kheng
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister of Interior
No.275 Norodom Blvd.
Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Fax/phone : +855-23-72 19 05/72 60 52/72 11 90
E-Mail: info@interior.gov.kh or moi@interior.gov.kh 

3. Mr. Ang Vong Vathna
Minster of Justice
No.240, Sothearos Blvd.
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Fax: + 855-23-36 41 19/21 66 22
E-mail: moj@cambodia.gov.kh

4. Mr. Dith Monty
President
Supreme Court
No. 30AB, Trasak Paem (St. 63)
Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Tel: +855-23-21 82 43
Tel/Fax: +855-23-21 28 26

5. Mrs. Ly Vuoch Leng
President
Court of Appeal
No. 14, Boulevard Sothearos
Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Tel: +855-23-21 84 60

6. Mr. Henro Raken
Prosecutor General
Court of Appeal
No.14, Boulevard Sothearos
Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Tel: +855-23-21 84 60

7. Mr. Chiv Keng
President
Phnom Penh Municipal Court
No. 31, Monireth (St. 217), corner Street 213
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA

8. Mr. Uk Savuth
Prosecutor
Phnom Penh Municipal Court
No. 31, Monireth (St. 217), corner Street 213
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA

9. General Hok Lundy
National Police Commissioner
General-Commisariat of National Police
Ministry of Interior
No.275 Norodom Blvd.
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Tel/Fax: +855-23-21 65 85/22 09 52

10. Ms Margo Picken
Director
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights - Cambodia
N¢X 10, Street 302
Sangkat Boeng Keng Kang I
Khan Chamcar Mon
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Tel: +855-23-987 671 / 987 672, 993 590 / 993 591 or +855 23 216 342
Fax: +855-23-212 579, 213 587

11. Prof. Yash Ghai
Special Representative of the Secretary-General for human rights in Cambodia
Attn: Ms. Afarin Shahidzadeh
Room 3-080
OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 91 79214
Fax: +41 22 91 79018 (ATTENTION: SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE CAMBODIA)

13. Mr. Ambeyi Ligabo
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
c/o J Deriviero
OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9177
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION)


Thank You.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrck@ahrchk.org)


URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-313-2006
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.