In the late afternoon of October 16, a week-long strike by workers at the Bright Sky garment factory in Dangkor district of Phnom Penh, Cambodia led to an open confrontation with management. When the strikers went to request that over ten of their peers be allowed to leave the factory, hundreds of heavily-armed police suddenly arrived on the scene. About 50 descended from trucks in the middle of the factory compound and immediately began shooting, and beating and electrocuting the workers with rifle butts and electric batons. Three workers were hit by bullets, one in the lower back and abdomen. Around ten were wounded in total; some 40 others lost consciousness during the melee. Three were arrested and released days later without charge.
Brutal police attacks on demonstrators, while common in Cambodia, violate police regulations. The Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials are both integral to the 1992 Criminal Law (commonly known as the UNTAC Law). Article 3 of the Code of Conduct only allows the police to “use force when strictly necessary and to the extent required in the performance of their duty”. The Basic Principles determine the circumstances for the use of firearms and impose certain requirements prior to use. According to Principle 9, the police cannot use firearms,
“Except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives.”
Principle 10 requires the police to
“Identify themselves as such and give a clear warning of their intent to use firearms, with sufficient time for the warning to be observed, unless to do so would unduly place the law enforcement officials at risk or would create a risk of death or serious harm to other persons, or would be clearly inappropriate or pointless in the circumstances of the incident.”
As in earlier similar instances, none of these requirements were met at the Bright Sky factory on October 16. On the contrary, the police seemed to do everything possible to violate every aspect of the code and basic principles. First, the conditions at the factory in no way required the use of force. The strike was lawful and peaceful. Secondly, the force used was vastly in excess of whatever objectives it was supposed to achieve. The number of police was disproportionate to what the circumstances required. They came carrying an unnecessary amount of weaponry, which they used without justification, as neither the lives nor physical integrity of the police or factory management were at risk. The crack team was brought into the factory on trucks and without warning, shooting on arrival, with the clear intention to frighten the strikers and violently disperse them at any cost. Thirdly, the three persons arrested had done nothing illegal and posed no threat.
What should the police have done? First, they should have come in a smaller number. Secondly, they should have carried only light and non-lethal arms, and not used them except in self defence, as stipulated in the code of conduct and basic principles. Thirdly, they could have formed a physical barrier between the management and workers and then requested them to disperse and seek to resolve their differences through the Labour Arbitration Council. Fourthly, they could have warned the strikers to withdraw from the compound or face possible police action. Fifthly, if the strikers had failed to comply with police orders, they could have given further warnings, as required by basic principle 10, that they would use force to remove them from the compound.
In view of the above, the Asian Human Rights Commission demands that the government of Cambodia immediately conduct a full public inquiry into the Bright Sky incident, and take legal and disciplinary action against the police officers who ordered this operation and those who fired shots and assaulted the workers in violation of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the Basic Principles for the Use of Force and Firearms.
The Asian Human Rights Commission also calls for an end to the habitual use of wanton force by the police on demonstrators, workers, farmers and other ordinary persons in Cambodia exercising their basic civil rights. This practice breaches not only the code of conduct and basic principles of the police, but also human rights provisions under domestic and international law.
To this end, the Asian Human Rights Commission urges the parliament to review all aspects of the use of weaponry, the maintenance of discipline and the application of salient laws and regulations among the police in Cambodia. Those ministers responsible for failures of enforcement and maintenance of discipline must also be held to account. Donor governments, United Nations agencies, international aid groups and the global human rights community too should play a role in compelling the government to discharge its obligations and effectively enforce all international human rights instruments and the laws of Cambodia.
