Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Cambodia): Development company allegedly frames and assaults villagers to seize property
 

UPDATE (Cambodia): Development company allegedly frames and assaults villagers to seize property

January 31, 2007

[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.]

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Update on Urgent Appeal

31 January 2007

[Re: UA-002-2007: CAMBODIA: Land grabbing leading to fraud charge and assault on owners]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-012-2007: CAMBODIA: Development company allegedly frames and assaults villagers to seize property     

CAMBODIA: forced land eviction (non-law abiding); police and military abuse; false charge against the victim
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received updated information concerning an alleged land grabbing case at Poh Toch village, Kompong Luong commune, Ponhea district, Kandal province, Phnom Penh (See further: UA-002-2007). The AHRC has learned that Chum Vanny who was summoned to court for fraud, while his land was being grabbed, has appeared in front of the prosecution but he has not been charged since. Apparently, there is no case against him. The AHRC has also learned that on January 26, Tep Sothy who is the governor of Ponhea Leu district went to Chum Vanny'gs land to investigate this particular land grabbing case. The AHRC has further learned, that Ms Suy Sophan, who is the owner of PHANEMEX company and is responsible for allegedly grabbing Chum Vanny's land, has not appeared in court as summoned in other land grabbing cases because of her good political connections. In one case in which Ms. Sophan was summoned, she had a provincial police commissioner appear in front of the prosecutor on her behalf.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

On the morning of 21 December 2006, ten police officers, four of whom were armed with assault rifles and the rest with electric batons, together with about ten staff and workers and led by three men employed by the land development company PHANEMEX. The group proceeded to assault Chum Vanny, 53, his wife, Noy Chamroeun, 51, and their two sons, when they protested against the company's grabbing of their land in Poh Toch village, Kompong Luong commune, Ponhea Leu district, Kandal province, along Highway 5 from Phnom Penh. In the assault, the perpetrators repeatedly chocked and beat Chum Thanith, 26, one of the sons with electric batons. Chum Thanith became unconscious and suffered open wounds at the top of his head, needing extended hospitalization. The company has since occupied the land and started work on it (UA-002-2007). 

On December 26, Chum Vanny was served a summons to appear before deputy-prosecutor Chreung Khmao for questioning on the charge of fraud as the company had accused him of having sold land to it and then having no land to give in return for the payment.

The AHRC has further learned that elite and powerful people are allegedly colluding with the local government authorities. Criminal charges are filed against those who have protested against land grabbing in order to subdue or silence them. Considering the chain of events surrounding this particular land dispute, the charge of fraud against Chum Vanny most likely has been laid to silence him and end his protest against the seizure of his land. If he had really sold the contested land to the company and had prevented the company to possess it, the company could and should have requested that the court issue an eviction order. This would then allow for the competent authorities to execute this order to possess the land.

The AHRC urges the Kandal province prosecutors to drop the alleged fraud charge against Chum Vanny and order PHANEMEX to return the land to its owners, abide by due process of the law and prove its ownership of the land that Chum Vanny and Noy Chamroeun had requested from the company in the first place. Should it fail to prove its ownership, its owner, Ms. Suy Sophan, and her responsible employees should be prosecuted for infringement upon privately owned land as stipulated in articles 248, 249, 250, 251, 253 and 254 of the Land Law 2001 of Cambodia. The same prosecution should order an investigation into Nou Seila's assault and battery on Noy Chamroeun on December 3, and the assault and battery on Chum Thanith by the men employed by the company on December 21, 2006. All those responsible for the offences should be brought to justice.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Chum Vanny continues to need your help and support. Please keep up your pressure on the Cambodian government and courts to intervene in ordering PHANEMEX to return the land it has grabbed to its lawful owner, Chum Vanny and to bring Ms Suy Sophan and her collaborators to court for the assault and injuries to Chum Thanith. Cambodia is, according to its constitution, a liberal democracy governed by the rule of law. Suy Sophan and her collaborators, and, for this matter, any person living in Cambodia, must not be allowed to be above the law.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear_________,

CAMBODIA: Development company allegedly frames and assaults villagers to seize property

Name of the victim:
1. Chum Vanny (53), farmer, Poh Toch village, Kompong Luang district, Ponhea Loeu district, Kandal province, Cambodia, charged with a fraud contract
2. Noy Chamroeun (51), wife of Chum Vanny
3. Chum Thanith (26), one of sons of Chum Vanny, severely injured by police attack
4. the other son of Chun Vanny
Alleged perpetrators:
1. 3 representatives from PHANEMEX Company named, Nou Seila, Thun, Hay
2. 10 armed police officers
3. 10 villagers led by the PHANEMEX Company
Place of the incident: Chum Vanny's rice farm at Poh Toch village, Kompong Luang district, Ponhea Loeu district, Kandal province
Date of the incident: From 3 to 21 December 2006

I am writing to voice my continued support for the above mentioned villagers who had their land unlawfully seized by the PHANEMEX Company. 

It is shocking that when Chum Vanny was summoned to court for fraud and appeared in front of the prosecution, his land was being seized by the alleged perpetrators. It now appears that there is in fact no case against him. This is highly disturbing since it clearly leads me to believe that he was only summoned to court so that the perpetrators could stop his protest in order to move in and seize his property.

I have also learned that on 26 January 2007, Tep Sothy who is the governor of Ponhea Leu district went to Chum Vanny's land to investigate this particular land grabbing case. Hopefully this will result in some positive outcome. Nonetheless, the company responsible is still laying claim to the property and their director seems to have guaranteed her own security through backdoor deals with the local officials. 

I know that Ms Suy Sophan who is the owner of PHANEMEX company and is responsible for grabbing Chum Vanny's land, has not appeared in court as summoned in other land grabbing cases allegedly because of her good political connections. I even learned that in one case in which Ms. Sophan was summoned, she had a provincial police commissioner appear in front of the prosecutor on her behalf.

Please let me remind you of the case at hand. On 21 December 2006, ten police officers, four of whom were armed with assault rifles and the rest with electric batons, together with about ten staff and workers and led by three men employed by the land development company PHANEMEX. The group proceeded to assault Chum Vanny, 53, his wife, Noy Chamroeun, 51, and their two sons, when they protested against that company's grabbing of their land in Poh Toch village, Kompong Luong commune, Ponhea Leu district, Kandal province, along Highway 5 from Phnom Penh. In the assault, the perpetrators repeatedly chocked and beat Chum Thanith, 26, one of the sons with electric batons. Chum Thanith became unconscious and suffered open wounds at the top of his head, needing extended hospitalization. The company has since occupied the land and started work on it.

Then on December 26, Chum Vanny was served a summons to appear before deputy-prosecutor Chreung Khmao for questioning on the charge of fraud as the company had accused him of having sold land to it and then having no land to give in return for the payment.

It has come to my attention that elite and powerful people are allegedly colluding with the local government authorities. Criminal charges are being filed against those who have protested against land grabbing in order to subdue or silence them. Considering the chain of events surrounding this particular land dispute, the charge of fraud against Chum Vanny most likely has been laid to silence him and end his protest against the seizure of his land. If he had really sold the contested land to the company and had prevented the company to possess it, the company could and should have requested that the court issue an eviction order. This would then allow for the competent authorities to execute this order to possess the land.

I therefore urge you to ensure that the Kandal province prosecutors takes action to drop the fraud charge against Chum Vanny and order PHANEMEX to return the land to its owners, abide by due process of the law and prove its ownership of the land that Chum Vanny and Noy Chamroeun had requested from the company in the first place. Should it fail to prove its ownership, its owner, Ms. Suy Sophan, and her responsible employees should be prosecuted for infringement upon privately owned land as stipulated in articles 248, 249, 250, 251, 253 and 254 of the land law of 2001. The same prosecution should order an investigation into Nou Seila's assault and battery on Noy Chamroeun on December 3, and the assault and battery on Chum Thanith by the men employed by the company on December 21, 2006. All those responsible for the offences should be brought to justice.

Yours sincerely,


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:

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

2. Mr. Samdech Chea Sim
Senate president
Chamcar Mon State Palace
Pheah Norodom Blvd
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Tel: +855-23-21 1441-3
Fax: +855-23-21 1446
Email: info@senate.gov.kh

3. Mr. Samdech Heng Samrin
President of National Assembly
Sothearos Street
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Tel: +855-23-21 41 36/21 77 68
Fax: +855-23-21 7769

4. Mr. Ang Vong Vathna
Minster of Justice
No 240, Sothearos Blvd.
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Fax: + 855-23-36 41 19/21 66 22

5. General Hok Lundy
National Police Commissioner
General-Commisariat of National Police
Phnom Penh
CAMBODIA
Tel/Fax: +855-23-21 65 85/22 09 52

6. Mr. Sok An
Deputy Prime Minister
President of the National Land Dispute Authority
# 41, Str Confederation de la Russie
Tel: +855 12 970 608
Fax: +855 23 881 045
E-mail: info@pressocm.gov.kh    

7. Mr. Eng Chhai Eang
Member of Parliament
Vice President of the National Land Dispute Authority
# 71 Sothearos Blvd, Sangkat Tonle Basac,
Khan Chamcar Morn
Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Tel: +855 12 73 1111
Fax: +855 23 211 336
Email: srphq@online.com.kh 

8. Ms Margo Picken
Director
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights - Cambodia
N 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

9. Prof. Yash Ghai
Special Representative of the Secretary-General for human rights in Cambodia
Attn: Ms. Marianne Haugaard
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)

10. Mr. Miloon Kothari
Special Rapporteur on adequate housing
Attn: Ms. Cecilia Moller
Room 4-066/010
UNOG-OHCHR
CH-1211, Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9265
Fax: +41 22 917 9010 (ATTENTION: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ADEQUATE HOUSING)


Thank you.

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



Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-012-2007
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.