Dear friends,
We wish to share with you the following article from LICADHO The Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights.
Asian Human Rights Commission
Hong Kong
————-
An article from LICADHO the Cambodia League for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights forwarded by the Asian Human Rights Commission
“A good journalist is one who dares to write the truth,” Hang Chakra explains, in an interview with LICADHO.
(An excerpt from Attacks & threats against human rights defenders in Cambodia 2008-2009)
Hang Chakra is the editor in chief of Khmer Machas Srok, one of the few remaining independent newspapers in Cambodia that publish in Khmer. Since late June 2010, his newspaper has been suspended for lack of financial resources, shortly after Chakra was pardoned by the King and released from prison where he was serving a sentence for disinformation.
“The government desperately wants all opposition newspapers to stop publishing,” he explains. “They are now engaging in a covert conflict. “All of his advertisers have been threatened by representatives of the ruling Cambodia People’s Party (CPP) of Prime Minister Hun Sen. In contrast, the pro-government Khmer newspapers are stocked with advertisements. Unfortunately without advertisement money or other financing, it is very difficult for a publication to survive.
Yet, in a country where most cannot read English and have no access to the internet, and where all televised media are controlled by the government, the role of independent Khmer newspapers is absolutely essential for the establishment of a healthy democracy.
Early Career
“I actually started off as a filmmaker,” Hang Chakra explains. In the early 1990s he joined Funcinpec, the royalist party and main opposition to the CPP. “I had witnessed a lot of oppression,” he adds, “and I wanted to fight for the freedom for the people.”
Funcinpec won a majority in the 1993 elections. Nevertheless, Hun Sen remained in power as co-Prime Minister, with Funcinpec leader Prince Norodom Ranariddh as co-Prime Minister. Hang Chakra was close to then Funcinpec co-Minister of the Interior, General Ho Sok. He never held an official government or party position, however. “I did not want political power,” Hang Chakra explains. “I preferred to take part in political life as an observer.”
At this time, Hang Chakra wrote his first newspaper articles for a publication called Khmer Citizen. His articles were critical of the CPP, and drew its attention. The editor-in-chief of the Khmer Citizen was pressured into joining the CPP in order to silence criticism from his paper. Hang Chakra’s articles were no longer wanted. He was poor, with no savings or business prospects.
“The only way for me to make a living was to sell my skills as a writer,” Hang Chakra says. “Still, I would not compromise with my ideals and commitments.”
Using a pen name so as to protect his family, he soon found employment as an independent writer for the National Soul, where he criticized both CPP and Funcinpec.
While working for this paper, he experienced his first serious threat as a journalist. He travelled to a Vietnamese rubber plantation — in Kampong Cham province — linked to the CPP. Upon arrival, he took one picture of a Vietnamese worker. Right away a guard confiscated his camera and destroyed the film. Two guards then pointed pistols at his head.
He was detained and would have been executed; only the discreet intervention of Ho Sok saved his life.
When he returned to Phnom Penh, he did not hesitate to write an article about the plantation, despite the threats. The article greatly angered the CPP, which arranged to have him fired from the National Soul.
His Own Paper
“From that moment, I resolved to create my own publication, so that I could be free to write what I thought,” Hang Chakra says.
Unfortunately his resolution coincided with the summer 1997 upheavals, when the Prime Minister ousted Prince Ranariddh from power. Hang Chakra’s protector, Ho Sok, was taken into custody and later found dead. Hang Chakra had to flee from his home.
He began to write articles for a publication called Interval. At first he expressed support for Prince Ranariddh. However when Prince Ranariddh agreed to join a new coalition government with Prime Minister Hun Sen in 1998, Hang Chakra began to be more critical. While in exile after the 1997 upheavals, Ranariddh had declared that he could never again work with the Prime Minister. Hang Chakra denounced Ranariddh’s change of mind in Interval, and accused him of colluding with the Prime Minister.
“Many people hated me for writing this article,” Hang Chakra says. Some Funcinpec members threatened to kill him. One day, in a coffee shop, he was accosted by the bodyguards of a prominent politician. They boasted loudly that they could kill him anytime they wished.
The editor of Interval was terrified of the threats, and fired Hang Chakra. Soon after, Interval closed and the editor accepted a position in the police department. This was a deciding event in the Hang Chakra’s life. For the third time, he had been ousted from a newspaper for expressing his views.
“I lost all of my faith in Funcinpec, or the handful of remaining newspaper publishers,” Hang Chakra recalls. “They do not care about societal good. Their only concern is their personal interest.”
The time was ripe to open his own newspaper.
The Voice of Khmer National Patriots
In mid-1998, Hang Chakra submitted an application to the Ministry of Information in order to open his own newspaper, called the Voice of Khmer National Patriots. The officials at the ministry, who knew his reputation, deliberately dragged their feet and failed to forward his forms in time. Furthermore Hang Chakra had to pay more than US$500 in bribes to file the official documents. To gather the sum, he sold all of his valuables.
“I was very upset,” he says, “and I became determined to fight against corruption.”
Finally, in 1999, his newspaper received the necessary authorization. It began publishing three times per week with four advertisers. He could only afford two staff members: one reporter, and another who translated articles about Cambodia in the English newspapers into Khmer. The newspaper enjoyed a wide readership from the start, and was one of the main political opposition publications.
After two years, the paper encountered financial difficulties due to the scarcity of advertisers, and he cut publication to once per week. Hang Chakra had to write articles for other newspapers in order to make ends meet.
In 2005, Hang Chakra finally believed that he had found a solution to his funding problems. With the help of a sponsor, he registered a new publication with the Ministry of Information, and even bought new cameras and computers for his staff. He called this new publication Khmer Machas Srok, literally translated as “Khmer Owners of the Country.” His sponsor promised to fund the publication of three issues per week.
“This was the first time that I could focus solely on the content of the paper,” Hang Chakra recalls, “and not worry about the finances.”
Unfortunately the CPP got wind of Hang Chakra’s new source of funding. They contacted the sponsor and threatened to have him fired from his job. Shortly after, the sponsor quit the opposition Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) and joined the CPP. He stopped returning Hang Chakra’s calls, and ended their friendship.
“From then on, I realized that my newspaper and I had to survive by ourselves,” Hang Chakra says. He had no more advertisers or external funding. His paper had to stay afloat on proceeds of sale alone, a nearly impossible task.
Nonetheless, he kept on publishing.
The Courts Intervene
More problems were to come. In 2008, Hang Chakra’s newspaper published an article accusing the Minister of Commerce Cham Prasidh of corruption. The article alleged that Prasidh had been meeting secretly with a mistress at a villa purchased with government funding. An official from the ministry requested that he stop the publication.
“Can you prove that these facts are incorrect?” Hang Chakra asked. His information had ostensibly been confirmed by the local police, who observed the minister entering the villa with his mistress.
Another newspaper, entitled the Khmer Land, decided to seize the opportunity to blackmail the impugned minister. Cham Prasidh was furious, and soon after the government filed charges in court against Khmer Land, which in turn accused Hang Chakra of publishing the article first. He was summoned to court to defend the article. The local police officer who had allegedly confirmed the story refused to testify. Luckily the minister was wary of further embarrassment and dropped the charges.
In 2009 Hang Chakra published articles accusing officials linked to Sok An, the deputy prime minister, of corruption. Soon afterwards, he received a court summons and learned that he stood accused of defamation and criminal disinformation. The prosecution requested a jail sentence and a 10 million riel fine.
At the preliminary hearing the court pressured Hang Chakra to reveal his sources inside the government. He refused, explaining that the Press Law protected such information.
“You are the court,” he told the judge, “and you have to uphold the law.” The judge was furious, and maintained that in court he had to reveal everything.
“The court does not enforce the law,” Hang Chakra says, “but only follows what is ordered by powerful people.”
Hang Chakra was told that charges might be dropped if he apologized publicly. He refused, despite the incarceration threat.
“I am not a criminal,” he declared.
Only nine days later, on 26 June 2009, his trial began in Phnom Penh.
Hang Chakra’s lawyer decided to request a postponement as it would have been impossible to prepare a defense in nine days. Hang Chakra certainly did not expect to be sentenced that day. But the court summarily rejected the request for a postponement, and at 11 a.m. began to try Hang Chankra in absentia.
At 11:30 a.m., Hang Chakra, who was in Battambang, received a call from his lawyer. He had just been sentenced to one year in jail and a 9 million riel fine. The police, who had been following him, arrested him minutes later. By 5 p.m. he was escorted to the Phnom Penh court, where he launched his appeal.
At 7:30 p.m. he was in prison.
Prison and Pardon
“I felt a moment of terror after the door was locked behind me,” Hang Chakra recalls. “There were so many prisoners in the room, over 50 of us in a small space. It was so hot; most of the prisoners were only wearing shorts. I had a tiny space to sleep in. I had to remain lying on my side. There was not enough air, everyone was smoking. I felt dizzy because of my heart condition. I suffered so much in that room.”
After interventions by UNOHCHR officials and LICADHO, Hang Chakra’s detention conditions improved slightly. He remained in a precarious state of health throughout his incarceration.
His appeal was dismissed after a brief hearing, where the judges interrupted his lawyer and asked him to cease his “political propaganda”.
Concerned over his deteriorating health, his children eventually wrote a letter to Prime Minister Hun Sen.
“This letter was against my ideals and my conscience,” Hang Chakra says, “but my family was very worried about my health.”
Finally, on 13 April 2010, shortly before the Khmer New Year, Hang Chakra received a Royal pardon and was released. The King had already intervened twice on his behalf: once with the Ministry of Justice and another time with the Prime Minister. He had spent a total of nine months and 17 days in prison.
Prime Minister Hun Sen had promised in early 2006 that no more journalists would be imprisoned because of what they wrote.
The Aftermath
“My experience in prison had a profound impact on me, both physically and mentally” Hang
Chakra says.
Yet he is more determined than ever to remain one of the lone voices of governmental criticism in the Khmer media.
“As long as I live, I will follow my conscience,” he says. “So long as the government is dysfunctional, I will denounce it publicly. Although I am getting older and older, I will carry on writing and training young journalists to continue my work. I will even say that if Khmer beliefs are correct, I will return in a next life to criticise the injustice of the government. I love this career, because the ideal of a journalist is to be like a mirror that reflects all of society.”
“While I was in jail, my newspaper was suspended after March 2, 2010, because of financial problems,” Hang Chakra continues. “People misunderstood this, however, and rumours floated about accusing me of ‘selling my hat’ to the government (i.e. selling out). Some even said that I had accepted a position in the Council of Ministers! I received so many phone calls after my release, and every time I repeated that I had not changed my values.”
Hang Chakra was able to resume publishing Khmer Machas Srok from early May to late June 2010, and is once again in search of funding. In one of his first editorials after his release, he publicly asked the government why he had been jailed for such a petty accusation, while those who killed journalists remained free.
The Cost of Freedom of Expression
“Nowadays most of the Cambodian media support the CPP,” Hang Chakra explains. “My opinion is that the CPP is in permanent election campaign mode, even when there are no elections. We are bombarded with broadcasts about the development projects organized by CPP officials. The media only ever report positive stories about the CPP. They never speak of the numerous problems plaguing Cambodia, like the state of prisons, sex trafficking or land grabbing. They avoid mentioning the many hardships of Cambodian people. I do not oppose development projects, but I think responsible media must balance positive and negative stories. Unfortunately, most of the media are under the control of the CPP, and the CPP only works for the interests of the party and its powerful friends.”
Despite his recent hardships, Hang Chakra maintains that he does not fear being arrested or even killed for his persistence in publishing critical articles.
“In Cambodia nowadays there exist many harsh realities, with no one to write about them,” he explains. “A journalist must accept the risk of being imprisoned or killed. Only if journalists do not fear will they possess the essential values necessary to serve the people.”
He expresses concern for the journalists who work in government-controlled media. “Some journalists love their careers because they love money,” he says. “And so they lose their integrity, their values and their conscience. I would ask them to take an honest look at themselves and their careers, and assess if they truly are proud of what they are. Even if they genuinely support the government, they should not forget to write about the hardships experienced by the Cambodian people.”
One thing is sure: Hang Chakra intends to remain a vocal critic of the current government, and strong defender of freedom of expression in Cambodia.
“If the news is bad,” he tells the government, “do not blame the journalist. Instead, blame yourself.”
Freedom of expression
(Excerpt from the General Assembly of the Human Rights Council Fifteenth Session)
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia — Surya P. Subedi
33. Freedom of expression is the lifeblood of democracy but it continues to be one of the main areas of concern in Cambodia. There does not seem to be a proper interpretation of the UNTAC criminal provision on defamation allowing for a proper balance between safeguarding private reputation and making public information concerning matters of public interest. The law regarding defamation and disinformation has been used selectively and in a biased manner against journalists, human rights activists and political leaders, and the courts do not seem to interpret the law and the restrictions on freedom of expression according to domestic laws, much less international standards binding Cambodia. The parliamentary immunity of three members of parliament — Sam Rainsy, Mu Sochua, and Ho Vann — all three belonging to the main opposition party – was lifted in 2009 to allow for criminal charges against them for defamation and/or disinformation
34. In none of these proceedings were the members of parliament given an opportunity to put their case before the National Assembly or rebut the charges levelled against them. This practice went against the basic principle of natural justice which requires that those accused of wrongdoing or committing a crime must be given an opportunity to present their case before action is taken against them. However, the courts did not look into such matters when finding them guilty of defamation. Similarly, the prosecution and imprisonment of journalists such as Hang Chakra, editor of the opposition newspaper Khmer Machas Srok, and another journalist, Ros Sokhet, should not take place in a normal functioning democracy as their actions have not undermined law and order or posed any threat to Cambodia’s national security interests.
35. Mr. Hang Chakra’s case is particularly illustrative of the practice of the judiciary in Cambodia. In May 2009, he faced a disinformation lawsuit filed by a lawyer acting on behalf of Sok An, a Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Council of Ministers, after his newspaper published an article on 5-7 April 2009 entitled, “Hun Sen has cracked down on bad and corrupt officials who are working around Sok An”. The article stated that Mr. Sok An was not enjoying the same degree of trust from the Prime Minister as in the past. On 21 May 2009, he published another article entitled “Officials Loyal to Sok An face Dismissals”. These two articles were used by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court and by the Appeal Court as evidence to find him guilty of disinformation and give him a one-year prison sentence evea though his articles posed no threat to law and order or national security of the country.
36. What is also intriguing is that while handling the case both of the Courts failed to apply the Press Law, which would require the affected party from the publication to seek a retraction by Mr. Hang Chakra, or. right to response. Immediately after being convicted by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court, Mr. Hang Chakra was arrested in Battambang proviace from which he was sent to Correctional Centre 1 (CC1). He appealed the judgment to the Appeal Court, but the latter upheld the court ruling. Mr. Hang Chakra did not appeal the verdict of the Appeal Court to the Supreme Court, believing that it would be ifitile. During his mission in January 2010 the Special Rapporteur visited him in prison. He was eventually granted a royal pardon by the King in April 2010 and released.
37. The verdict of the Courts focused on how the article was written in bad faith and the information was incorrect. The courts did not give any legal reasoning as to why or how the article published by Mr. Hang Chakra could disturb public peace, a necessary element of the offence of disinformation under article 62 of the UNTAC Criminal Provisions. It was intriguing that the prosecutors did not investigate the case but sent the matter directly to trial judges. Nor did the investigating judge get involved in the investigation of the case. The articles were published in April and May 2009 and Mr. Hang Chakra was convicted in June, a very speedy conviction by any standards. This gave rise to suspicion that the judiciary was intent on convicting and punishing Mr. Hang Chakra.
38. The trial was very swift and Mr. Hang Chakra’s lawyer did not have time to prepare the case. He asked the judge to delay the trial, but his request was rejected. Neither Mr. Hang Chakra nor his lawyer had the opportunity to submit arguments in defense. The trial took about one hour and Mr. Hang Chakra was found guilty in absentia. After his arrest, his lawyer appealed to the Appeal Court. The lawyer had a strong argument to make, that this was not a criminal but a civil matter since Mr. Hang Chakra’s articles had not caused any unrest or posed any threat to national security, but the judges of the Court of Appeal did not allow him to submit his arguments. The judges focused their attention on making Mr. Hang Chakra admit the charges rather than enter into the merits of the case.
39. The Special Rapporteur is aware that there have been some positive developments in some cases in the recent past with regard to the interpretation of the law on disinformation. One such example is the verdict of the Takeo Provincial Court to acquit two human rights defenders, Cheab Chiev and Khoem Sarum, a Radio Free Asia journalist, Sok Serey and Cham Community representatives Ny San and Seb Sein on charges of disinformation. Charges had been brought against these five individuals following an interview on Radio Free Asia broadcast in December 2008 during which they alleged corruption on the part of the local officials in Kampong Youl village in Takeo Province. They were charged in September 2009 with, inter alia, disinformation under the UNTAC criminal provisions. The crime requires both an element of malicious intent and evidence that the information that has been publicized would be “disturbing or likely to disturb the public peace”. In deciding to drop the disinformation charges, the Takeo Provincial Court specifically stated that there had been a lack of malicious intent on the part of the accused. This was a welcome development and the Special Rapporteur hopes that other courts will follow suit in future defamation and disinformation cases by entering into the merits of the case and provide legal reasoning for their judgment. However, the Special Rapporteur also hopes that the subsequent appeal by the Prosecutor in this case will not lead to the reversal of the verdict. |
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
