The total destruction of the Thai embassy and businesses in Phnom Penh on January 29, widely reported by the international media, does not come as a surprise to anyone who has worked on the Cambodian justice system since the elections of 1993 under the UN Transitional Authority for Cambodia (UNTAC). These events reveal that there has not been even an inch of progress in reforms to the law enforcement system there.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has consistently pointed out that this failure is the number one problem obstructing not only Cambodian democracy but also Cambodia’s return to the rule of law. AHRC has observed that anarchy and chaos prevail in Cambodia as it lacks a foundation upon which to cement an orderly society. AHRC’s urgent call to prioritize police, prosecution and judicial reforms has fallen on deaf ears. The sheer ugliness of this situation is marked by the fact that to date neither a proper Penal Code nor Criminal Procedure Code exists. Even the international community, which has spent time and resources trying to set up an international court to try former Khmer Rouge leaders, has done nothing to help improve the local \"justice system\", which deprives every living Cambodian the possibility of enjoying a society that respects the law.
The response of Prime Minister Hun Sen to the Thai embassy incident is typical of the way justice has been dispensed in Cambodia for decades. He was quoted as saying that, \"The Government was incompetent for failing to crack down on the riots for the following reasons: we could not control the inflammatory information and did not use armed force to shoot rioters.\" The Prime Minister’s admission of government responsibility for the failure to prevent this incident was accompanied by remarks that show he simply is unable to comprehend the causes of this chaos.
The first question he should have asked himself is what were the police doing prior to, during and after the incident? This question simply does not arise in Cambodia, due to the very nature of the \"police\". Ill paid, ill trained police, which do not function under any orderly command, are not a group that anyone would think of as capable of preventing a riot. Naturally, it did not even occur to the Prime Minister to ask what role the police might have played or failed to play in this incident. His mind instead went to the armed forces. Despite a constitution declaring Cambodia a liberal democracy, for all practical purposes, the old rules of governance continue: \"armed force\" is the solution.
In recent years, Cambodia’s earlier rule of the gun had been diminished, and some opposition groups held public demonstrations without being attacked. This, however, was mostly due to the intervention and even physical presence of the international community. Today, due to the lack of a rationally functioning police force overseen by an effective judiciary, a return to the armed forces shooting rioters is all that the Prime Minister can think about.
Meanwhile, large numbers of persons are being rounded up and taken to courts. Are they the real culprits? The lack of a credible system of investigations will leave this question unanswered. Given the financial consequences of this event, in which a vital business partner has suffered badly, and given the international publicity, some people will need to be punished. Whether or not they are actually guilty of anything will remain a mystery.
Last year, the champion of economic privatization, Milton Friedman, remarked that, \"It turns out that the rule of law is probably more basic than privatization. Privatization is meaningless if you do not have the rule of law.\" The fate of those Thai businessmen who made their investments in a country with no basic rule of law will naturally be taken seriously by others. The economic consequences on Cambodia, which is already impoverished, are sad to reflect upon.
The lesson from this incident is that judicial institutions–the police, prosecution and judiciary–must be firmly secured to ensure stability in Cambodia, including security for outside investors. This will require serious involvement by the international community, as there are powerful local interests militating against development of the rule of law in Cambodia.
The international community owes it to Cambodia to reflect upon the failures of the UNTAC mission, which aimed to build a liberal democracy there, but fell far short of its goal. This failure should be acknowledged but regarded not as a matter of shame so much as a question of integrity for the United Nations and other international agencies. The United Nations must begin negotiations with the government and back it with material resources to bring about reforms. Thailand can play a great role, motivated by opportunities for trade and investment in a stable neighbour. For example, international judges, prosecutors and trained police can be recruited to fill institutional gaps until Cambodia’s judicial institutions are upgraded and capable of undertaking their mandate effectively. Without such external recruitment and intervention there is no way that Cambodia can move forward. In fact, given the sheer devastation of recent decades, Cambodia’s situation is much worse than that of any other country in the region. Hopefully this most recent incident will lead to more sobering reflections on Cambodia’s problems, and more effective solutions.
04 February 2003
Asian Human Rights Commission – AHRC, Hong Kong
______________________________________________________________________________
Asian Human Rights Commission – AHRC
Unit 4, 7th Floor, Mongkok Commercial Centre
16 Argyle Street, Kowloon
Hong Kong SAR, CHINA
Tel: +(852) 2698-6339
Fax:+(852) 2698-6367
E-mail: ahrchk@ahrchk.org
Web site: ahrchk.net
For media contacts after office hours, please contact through: +(852) 26969130 (Basil Fernanso) or +(852) 92505990 (Sanjeewa Liyanage)
