Most of the NGOs involved with the
so-called Electoral Reform Alliance would describe themselves as supporters of
human rights. It may therefore come as a surprise to some readers to discover
that the report of the ERA released in early December firmly advocates
curtailing the rights of Cambodians who serve in the armed forces or in the
civil service.
It does this in two ways. First, it
argues that the law already deprives the armed forces and civil servants
of the right to participate in politics. Then, it argues that the “enforcement”
of the law should be “strengthened” in ways that would severely limit armed
forces’ and civil servants’ political rights.
It begins by quoting the law
regarding civil servants: “Any civil servant shall be neutral when exercising
his/her functions and shall forbid himself/herself to use his/her position and
the State facilities to undertake the following political activities: to work
for or against a political party and to work for or against a political
candidate. Any behavior contrary to this Article shall constitute a transgression
or a professional breach.” (p. 12)
That is pretty straightforward, as
is the corresponding law for the military: “Military personnel shall be neutral
in their functions and work activities, and the use of functions/titles and
State’s materials for serving any political activities shall be prohibited.”
The laws forbid civil servants or
armed forces to use state property or to perform their functions in a way that
favours a political party. But neither civil servants nor military personnel
are on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The laws do not prohibit
political activity during times when they are not performing their official
duties. But the ERA report authors simply ignore the plain meaning of the laws
they have quoted so they can pretend that CPP military personnel and civil
servants are violating the law:
“The CPP has wide organizational
party structures within the state administration and the police and military
forces, counter to the law … [Provincial and district governors, department
chiefs etc.] were assigned functions as civil servants and therefore were
prohibited from taking part in any political party activity, but they were
serving as heads of CPP committees and CPP committee members in a number of
provinces and districts.”
“Prohibited from taking part in any
political party activity”! This is pure invention by the ERA, and it is
contrary to both Cambodian and international law.
Article 7.7 of the Regulations and
Procedures for the Election of the Members of the National Assembly of the
Fifth Mandate clearly states: “After or besides working hours or besides the
official work capacity, civil servants, local authorities of all levels, royal
armed forces, police and judicial officers may participate in campaign
activities to support any political party or candidate, but shall not be in
uniform and/or shall not carry weapons.”
And Article 25 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights declares:
“Every citizen shall have the right
and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and
without unreasonable restrictions:
(a) To take part in the conduct of
public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives;
(b) To vote and to be elected at
genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and
shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of
the electors;
(c) To have access, on general terms
of equality, to public service in his country.”
Contrary to this international
covenant, the “human rights” NGOs of the ERA don’t want the armed forces and
civil servants to enjoy normal political rights – ever. One of their
“recommendations” is:
“The enforcement of laws
guaranteeing the neutrality of judges, village chiefs, authorities, and armed
forces personnel (including police) should be strengthened in order to prevent
them from participating actively in any political party activities and
electoral campaigns, either during or after working hours (p. 14, my
emphasis).”
Why should any Cambodian who joins
the armed forces or gets a job as a civil servant have to give up the right to
participate in political activity? If someone in such a position says to a
family member, “I think the X Party deserves my vote”, would that person be
removed from their position under the “strengthened enforcement” advocated by
the ERA for the offence of participating in an electoral campaign? A right to
vote that doesn’t include the right to discuss parties and political issues
doesn’t mean very much.
As I pointed out in an earlier
article, the ERA report is openly dismissive of elected bodies like commune
councils, precisely because they are elected. It calls for “independent
organisations” (meaning the NGOs involved) to take over various electoral
functions, including selection of the NEC. The desire to restrict the political
rights of civil servants and military personnel is quite consistent with this
distrust of voters.
For all their talk about “democracy”
and “human rights”, the organisations using the name ERA display a thoroughly
anti-democratic attitude, in which a self-appointed elite, generally
foreign-funded, makes the important decisions but takes no responsibility: even
their recommendations are cited as coming simply from “independent observers”;
ordinary people have no right to know who is proposing laws and
regulations on their behalf.
By
Allen Myers