Re: Cambodia genocide tribunal takes Khmer Rouge ex-foreign minister Ieng Sary and his wife into custody

On Nov 11, 9:04 pm, Chim <Chi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Cambodia genocide tribunal takes Khmer Rouge ex-foreign minister into
custody
By KER MUNTHIT,Associated Press Writer AP - 1 hour 11 minutes agoPHNOM
PENH, Cambodia - Police detained the ex-foreign minister of the brutal
1970s Khmer Rouge regime and his wife and brought them to Cambodia's
U.N.-backed genocide tribunal Monday to face charges, a tribunal
spokesman said.

Former Khmer Rouge Foreign Minister Ieng Sary and his wife, Ieng
Thirith, who served the regime as a minister for social affairs, were
brought to offices of the tribunal's co-investigating judges in Phnom
Penh under warrants issued for both of them, said tribunal spokesman
Reach Sambath.

The radical policies of the communist Khmer Rouge, who held power in
1975-79, are widely blamed for the deaths of some 1.7 million people
from starvation, disease, overwork and execution. None of the group's
leaders have faced trial yet.

Both are accused of involvement in the slayings of political
opponents, according to documents from prosecutors seen by The
Associated Press.

Police detained the couple at their Phnom Penh residence at dawn.
Officers later brought them "smoothly" to tribunal offices, where they
were to make an initial appearance before the judges later Monday,
Reach Sambath said, without relating what charges they faced.

The arrests of Ieng Sary and his wife had been widely anticipated, as
they were believed to be two of five unnamed suspects earlier listed
by tribunal prosecutors. Two others have already been taken into
custody.

Ieng Sary, thought to be 77, was not available for comment. But like
other surviving Khmer Rouge leaders, he has repeatedly denied
responsibility for any crimes.

The tribunal was created last year after seven years of contentious
negotiations between the United Nations and Cambodia. Critics have
warned that the aging suspects could die before ever seeing a
courtroom.

Ieng Sary served as a deputy prime minister as well as foreign
minister in the Khmer Rouge regime.

Ieng Sary, "promoted, instigated, facilitated, encouraged and/or
condoned the perpetration of the crimes" when the Khmer Rouge held
power, according to a July 18 filing by the prosecutors to the
tribunal's judges, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated
Press.

It said there was evidence of Ieng Sary's participation in crimes
included planning, directing and coordinating the Khmer Rouge
"policies of forcible transfer, forced labor and unlawful killings."

"I have done nothing wrong," Ieng Sary told The Associated Press in
October in Bangkok, Thailand, where he was visiting for a medical
checkup.

"I am a gentle person. I believe in good deeds. I even made good deeds
to save several people's lives (during the regime). But let them (the
tribunal) find what the truth is," he said without elaborating.

The alleged crimes of his wife, Ieng Thirith, who is believed to be
75, included her participation in "planning, direction, coordination
and ordering of widespread purges ... and unlawful killing or murder
of staff members from within the Ministry of Social Affairs," the
prosecutors' filing said.

Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot died in 1998, and his former military
chief, Ta Mok, died in 2006 in government custody.

Nuon Chea, the former Khmer Rouge ideologist, and Kaing Guek Eav, also
known as Duch, who headed the Khmer Rouge S-21 torture center, were
detained earlier this year on charges of war crimes and crimes against
humanity.

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/

Looking back at the 1979 People's Revolutionary Tribunal

By Charles McDermid

As the present Khmer Rouge trial staggers to wards an uncertain
future, its interesting to discuss the divergent opinions surrounding
its polemic predecessor - the People's Revolutionary Tribunal to Try
the Pol Pot-Ieng Sary Clique for the Crime of Genocide held from
August 15 to 19, 1979.

An ignominious failure chock full of campy communist rhetoric to some,
an essential outpouring of emotion to others, the PRT rarely inspires
neutrality. Both camps agree it was a political, propagandistic tool
crafted by the Hanoi-backed government. Both groups concede that the
some of the evidence and testimony collected just days after the fall
of the Democratic Kampuchea regime is important.

But agreement ends there. There is no consensus on how the trial
should be remembered, or if its alleged evidentiary accomplishments
are overshadowed by its motives. Experts say how the PRT may impact
the Extraordinary Chambers of the Courts of Cambodia, and the exact
role it played in shaping the present ruling government are uncertain.
Once described as "part historical truth, part political strategy" the
PRT remains a divisive benchmark in modern Cambodian history.

"It was partially successful as both. Good testimony came out, and it
was an excellent strategy for a tainted invading power, and its
previously DK figures to wipe the slate clean by shouting mantras:
genocide! Pol Pot! Ieng Sary!" said David Chandler, author of Brother
No 1. "It stopped any legal questions being asked about how widespread
the Khmer Rouge had been. This suited people at the time and has
suited Cambodians at the top [of government] ever since."

Author Evan Gottesman wrote in Cambodia After the Khmer Rouge that the
decision to sentence only Pol Pot and Ieng Sary "concealed a debate
within the Party over the role of former Khmer Rouge cadres in the new
regime.... The failure to mention other top Khmer Rouge leaders (Nuon
Chea for instance) suggested that they, too, might at some point, be
co-opted. "

French scholar Henri Locard believes it was because the government was
still trying to strike a deal with former Khmer Rouge leader Nuon Chea
due to his stronger ties to Hanoi.

"The urgency in 1979 stemmed from the need of the new government to
demonstrate itself at once as an opponent of all the Khmer Rouge
represented. For example, as a protector of Buddhist heritage, the
traditional Cambodian family, a defender of national minorities, etc,"
said Howard De Nike, co-editor of Genocide in Cambodia, a compilation
of essays and PRT courts records.

The witness called to testify to the systematic destruction of
Buddhist culture, and the murder of monks was Tep Vong, now the Great
Supreme Patriarch of Cambodia's clergy.

"The 1979 trial obviously lacked some essential ingredients of due
process, but this should not prevent an appreciation of what it
accomplished: public exposure of the Khmer Rouge brutality when most
were still unaware."

But Philip Short, a strident critic of the PRT, questions the impact
of the trial outside Cambodia. In 1979 the US at the time was opposing
the PRK regime..

"Some argue that it showed the world for the first time the iniquities
of the Khmer Rouge regime. Were that true, [Quigley] might have a
point. But it didn't," Short said. "The only coverage of the tribunal
was by communist or pro-communist journalists, who were at the time
the only correspondents allowed to report from Cambodia. I think it
failed even as propaganda. Those so-called jurists who took part in
it, seeking to lend a simulacrum of credibility, should be ashamed of
themselves."

Despite it's dearth of defendants, the PRT did bring up two names that
won't be mentioned by the ECCC: the US and, more vigorously, China.

"At the time people in general weren't satisfied that just two people
were being tried. As witnesses we were asked to describe our suffering
under the Khmer Rouge," said Thun Saray, a witness to the court and
now executive director of ADHOC. " As for the attack on China, that
came from the political people in charge. As witnesses, we didn't know
about that. We knew they would try two people and the Chinese. The
regime dictated all the statements of the trial."

As Gottesman wrote "...the propaganda thus described the Khmer Rouge
as Maoist rather than Communist - sparing Marxism-Leninism the taint
of genocidal association."

American John Quigley remembers driving through Phnom Penh to the
adhoc courtroom set up, appropriately, at Chaktomuk Theatre. He
recalls a "ghost town" of abandoned urban villas, rusted Renaults and
smashed storefronts. Along with other foreign experts invited by the
government, Quigley was escorted from his hotel to the court by armed
convoy. The capital, he said, was unstable and bristling with
automatic weapons.

"My most lasting impression of the trial was the emotion visibly felt
by those in the audience about what had occurred. As witnesses of
would testify about atrocities against them and their families, it was
obvious that those in attendance were recalling atrocities of which
they and their families had been victim," said Quigley, author of the
just published "The Genocide Convention: An International Law
Analysis. "

Quigley was one of two American attorneys present at the PRT as part
of an international junket comprised mostly of jurists from
"sympathetic" countries.

"I was asked to make a statement, in the capacity of an expert
witness, about the legal definition of genocide, and whether it
applied to the charges being laid under the Genocide Convention. I
examined the definition and decided that it did apply in the
situation," said Quigley in an e-mail. "Many in the international
community did not consider that genocide could be committed when the
perpetrators and the victims are from the same racial, national or
religious group. That issue has continued to be contentious."

Quigley believes the PRT had unprecedented elements. He claims the PRT
was the first time the charge of genocide, as it was defined in the
Genocide Convention, had been used. Also, while the trial was designed
to link Khmer Rouge atrocities with the policies of Maoist China-
Quigley's own testimony pointed elsewhere.

"I think I was the only one at the trial to mention the United States,
and the extensive bombing of Cambodia, as a factor that may have
facilitated the emergence of the Khmer Rouge's policies," he said. "I
don't recall anyone at the trial objecting to the analysis at the
time, but the point may have been viewed as of minor importance."

"Unimpressive" is how Milton Osborne described the international
participants at the PRT.

In fact, the other American attorney, the late Hope Stevens, was
condemned as an apologist and ridiculed for telling the court "It is
now clear to all that Pol Pot and Ieng Sary are criminally insane
monsters." After all, he was one of their defense lawyers.

The head of the defense team, Dith Munty who was then working in the
Ministry of Propaganda, recommended the death penalty verdict be given
in absentia. Munty is currently the President of the Supreme Court.
The head of the PRT was Kev Chenda, at the time Minister of
Propaganda.

"Kev Chenda was not a judge and Dith Munty didn't defend at all," said
Saray. "This trial was a product of socialist times. Everyone knew it
was political."

Still, Saray's recollections of the PRT are emotional.

"At the time, a lot people were angry because the killing from the
regime was so fresh. There were a lot of people at the court. There
were horrible, horrible stories. A lot of people cried during the
court when they heard the terrible things that happened to other
people," said Saray, who was imprisoned by the Khmer Rouge and
"brainwashed" for nearly a year. "I felt that I was maltreated by the
Khmer Rouge, but compared to what I heard... I was shocked by the
violations of the Khmer Rouge."

Phnom Penh Post, Issue 16 / 02, January 26 - February 8, 2007
© Michael Hayes, 2007. All rights revert to authors and artists on
publication.
For permission to publish any part of this publication, contact
Michael Hayes, Editor-in-Chief
http://www.PhnomPenhPost.com - Any comments on the website to
Webmaster

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/

The People's Revolutionary Tribunal generally divides Cambodia experts
and activists into three distinct camps: those who dismiss it as
propaganda, those who consider it's evidentiary material important,
and
those find it's possible to feel both ways. The Post asked: how
history
will remember the PRT?

"It won't. It was of a character that only a real Stalinist could
think
of. The script was written in Hanoi. The defense lawyer recommended
the
death penalty!"

- Stephen Morris, author of Why Vietnam invaded Cambodia

"To my mind, the 1979 trial, for its flaws, served a more significant
purpose than trials that may be held now. At that time, the Khmer
Rouge
were known, but not widely, and the Khmer Rouge were vying to return
to
political power. So putting the spotlight on the atrocities in a way
that would explain them to the rest of the world was quite important."

- John Quigley, expert witness at the PRT, author of "The Genocide
Convention: An International Law Analysis," co-editor of Genocide in
Cambodia

"People at the time considered the trial and sentencing of Pol Pot and
Ieng Sary very fair because the pain was so fresh. Some people still
had wound marks and at Toul Sleng you could still smell the blood."

- Chhum Bun, secretary-general of the Royal Academy of Cambodia

"The PRT was set up by the Communist Party and the people in charge
were not legal experts, just ordinary people with no understanding of
the law. The verdict of this court wasn't fair at all because they
listened to higher officials in the Party."

- Kem Sokha, testified at the PRT, now president of the Cambodian
Center for Human Rights

"The 1979 trial, to an extent, has served the purpose of 'raising the
sights' of the ECCC, This is beneficial. But once again, I would
emphasize the value of the 1979 trial, and not focus on its
shortcomings. It's easy for academicians to snipe at the 1979 trial.
But those behind the 1979 proceeding and those today share many
objectives. Moreover, the world today has a vastly greater store of
"post-regime justice" than existed in 1979."

- Howard De Nike, co-editor of Genocide in Cambodia, law professor of
University of San Francisco

"The evidence that came out was stunning. But, overall, it was more
negative than positive. It was an excuse for the Vietnamese to justify
their occupation of Cambodia. It was bungled: it only lasted two days
and the judges were fellow travelers not professional judges."

- Henri Locard, author of Pol Pot's Little Red Book: the sayings of
Angkar

"The PRT was a legitimate attempt with meager resources to
establishing
the enormity of the Khmer Rouge crimes, and by inference the
legitimacy
of the new regime. The 1979 trail was important, but not only was of
limited legal value-its presentation of history was skewered in part
to
fit the political framework designed by Hanoi."

-Tom Fawthrop, co-author of Getting Away with Genocide

"For the witnesses, we were asked to describe our lives during the
Khmer Rouge. As for the attacks on China, that came from the political
people. As witnesses we didn't know why they tried only two people and
the Chinese. It was the regime that dictated the statements of the
trial."

-Thun Saray, witness for the PRT, now executive director of ADHOC.

"I find Quigley's remarks breathtaking. What did the PRT accomplish?
With respect, nothing whatever. It was a dishonest Stalinist show
trial
mounted by the Vietnamese government and its satellite in Phnom Penh,
both of which were, at the time, Stalinist-type regimes. Despite a
window dressing of western fellow-travellers, there was no
recognizable
judicial process and the proceedings discredited everyone, without
exception, who was in any way associated with them."

- Philip Short, author of Pol Pot: Anatomy of a Nightmare

"Historically, swift action - a surgical strike-was necessary and
nicely taken. In terms of later history, the fresh evidence of the
trial, much of it undisputed 25 years later has an intrinsic value.
Culturally, it may at the time have been helpful (as it's often been
since) to blame the PRK on one man or two. But this was the wrong two.
If one were to blame two, Nuon Chea is way ahead of Ieng Sary."

- David Chandler, author of Brother Number One

"On the character of the PRT, it's interesting that even a commentator
as sympathetic to the emerging PRK regime, Margaret Slocum in her The
People's Republic of Kampuchea 1979-1989, allows that what took place
was a 'show trial'. And it surely was, with the whole apparatus of
delegations from friendly socialist countries and similarly oriented
organizations. I suppose an argument may be made that the exercise was
cathartic, but I'm not sure that this is very convincing, not least
since it is clear that the Pol Pot period remains an unresolved shadow
over contemporary Cambodia, a fact that many hope will change after
the
ECCC process takes place. It's worth noting, moreover, that the PRT
receives scant mention in any general histories of the PRK, whatever
the particular sympathies of the writer who reviews that period.

- Milton Osborne, author of Sihanouk: Prince of Light, Prince of
Darkness

"The PRT was set up to try Khmer Rouge leaders Pol Pot and Ieng Sary
because the public knew them well as Brother No 1 and 2. They were
sentenced in absentia by the court. The trial included a small number
of witnesses [who suffered under the Khmer Rouge] and by foreign legal
experts. Some Western countries which supported the Khmer Rouge
rejected the decision, but we had legal experts there to witness. At
that time we still had the Cold War."

- Khieu Kanharith, Minister of Information, who assisted in the
publication of PRT documents

Phnom Penh Post, Issue 16 / 02, January 26 - February 8, 2007
© Michael Hayes, 2007. All rights revert to authors and artists on
publication.
For permission to publish any part of this publication, contact
Michael
Hayes, Editor-in-Chief
http://www.PhnomPenhPost.com - Any comments on the website to Webmaster

.

Relevant Pages