The Bangkok Post’s 29 November editorial concerning the current
trial of former Khmer Rouge leaders contains numerous inaccuracies, large and
small. To take them roughly in order:
1. The title of the
editorial, calling the proceedings a “show trial”, is a slander for which the
editorial offers no justification whatsoever. Indeed, the first sentence
contradicts the headline, referring to the trial as the “most important international trial of our time”.
2. The opening session of the trial lasted three days, not two.
3. The defendants are not
“too feeble” to feel the consequences of the trial. The claim that they are
would make sense only if they were too feeble to know whether they were in
prison or walking free. In fact, two of the three defendants were strong enough
to make lengthy opening statements. The third, Ieng Sary, read a short
statement and did not say more because of a legal consideration.
4. “The enormity of the
crimes of the Khmer Rouge have [sic] long been known, but never widely
addressed or, in many cases, acknowledged.” These crimes may not have featured
prominently in the pages of the Bangkok Post, but they are frequently
addressed in Cambodia in both government and private commemorations, as well as
in numerous written histories, published articles and books of survivors,
documentary films, art works etc. As well, there was a Cambodian trial, in
absentia, of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary in 1979.
5. The tribunal was created
only in 2006. It is therefore impossible for it to have spent “decades” doing
anything, let alone on “establish[ing] a trial system”. It is hard to be
certain what, if anything, the Post’s editorial writer means by that
phrase, but it may refer to the judges’ adoption of the court rules. The KR
tribunal took one year to adopt its rules. This may seem like “decades” to
some, but it was done more rapidly than by any other international/mixed
tribunal of modern times.
6. “The Cambodian
government was the chief stumbling block, particularly Prime Minister Hun Sen.”
As written in the Post, this makes the Royal Government and Prime
Minister Hun Sen responsible for the tribunal taking “decades” (one year)
to adopt its rules. The writer may, however, be trying to imply as well that
the tribunal has done little else. Evidently, he/she is not aware that
preparing trials of this importance and complexity requires a certain amount of
time for things like interviewing witnesses and compiling evidence. That is
what the tribunal has been doing, in addition to having conducted the trial of
Duch; it has not been “blocked” by the Royal Government or anyone else.
7. “Foreign governments,
including Thailand, were sometimes reluctant and never enthusiastic about
establishing the special courts [sic] to try” the Khmer Rouge. Never reluctant
to display his/her ignorance, the Post’s editorial writer tells us that
there is more than one court trying the KR. Of more substance, the delay in
establishing the tribunal was not due to a lack of enthusiasm by foreign
governments, but to the fact that the Khmer Rouge leaders were not in custody.
From the moment they were driven from power in early 1979, they were protected
and supported diplomatically, materially, financially and militarily by a
number of foreign governments. This support was reduced only after 1993, and in
these more favourable circumstances, in the late 1990s the Royal Government’s
“win-win” policy succeeded in destroying the KR’s military and political
organisation. Only at this point did trials become possible.
8. Pol Pot “died in his bed in a remote
province”. This is true, but incomplete. Pol Pot died about as far from Phnom
Penh as it is possible to go and still be in Cambodia. The location was very
close to an international border.
9. Prime Minister Hun
Sen “fears inquiries of just how close he was to the top as a Khmer Rouge
military commander”. No, he doesn’t. No one who can be taken seriously has ever
accused him of being high up in the KR hierarchy. Samdech Hun Sen was
seriously wounded on 16 April 1975, the day before the KR took Phnom Penh. He
was hospitalised until January 1976. At that point, Samdech Hun Sen was
less than 24 years old; there were no important leaders of the KR of that age.
He was sent to the Eastern Zone (one of seven zones into which the KR divided
the country). Within the Eastern Zone, there were five regions. Samdech Hun
Sen was assigned to be deputy commander of one of three regiments stationed
in one of the five regions; he ranked number 7 in the military hierarchy of
that region. The Post’s editorial writer appears to be unaware that Samdech
Hun Sen quickly realised the disaster the KR was causing and risked his
life by helping to organise its overthrow.
It is hard to know whether ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation
played the bigger role in the production of the Post’s editorial.
Neither explanation does the paper any credit.
Phnom Penh, 01 December 2011
Press and Quick Reaction Unit
Office Of the Council of Ministers