CAMBODIA SHOULD NOT BE ACCUSED OF PRACTISING "CULTURE OF IMPUNITY", DELEGATION TELLS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE

AFTERNOON


HR/CT/99/11
14 July 1999





A Government delegation from Cambodia this afternoon told the Human Right Committee that Cambodia was not practising a "culture of impunity" with regard to perpetrators of crimes, including the leaders and members of the Khmer Rouge regime.

The remarks were made as the Committee continued its consideration of an initial report from Cambodia on how that country was implementing the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which it is a party.

The representative of Cambodia told the Committee that Cambodia did not deserve to be accused of practising a "culture of impunity" merely on the basis that the perpetrators of the crimes during the Khmer Rouge were not yet brought to justice. Actually, the Government had taken all appropriate measures to continue investigation against those who participated in the past crimes.

Cambodia, as one of the 144 States parties to the International Covenant, must submit periodic reports to the Committee on how it was implementing the provisions of the treaty.

When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 15 July, it is expected to conclude its consideration of the initial report of Cambodia.

Discussion

In response to a number of queries raised by Committee members in the course of the morning meeting, the delegate from Cambodia said that article 51 of his country’s Constitution on civil servants could not be repealed by the Constitutional Council. That measure would be unconstitutional and would go against the principle of the country's legal system. The Government
itself should review the law and present a proposal to the National Assembly with a view to amend such laws. Article 51 provided that, except in case of flagrante delicto, no civil servant might be arrested or prosecuted for any crime unless the concerned minister gave his consent in advance. However, military personnel could be directly charged by the country's prosecutor if sufficient evidence had been found to do so.

Concerning the reference by some experts to a "culture of impunity" , the delegation said that such a notion was alien to Cambodians and it did not exist in the society. Cambodia did not deserve to be accused of practising a "culture of impunity" merely on the basis that the perpetrators of the crimes during the Khmer Rouge regime were not yet brought to justice. Actually, the Government had taken all the measures which enabled the continuation of investigations against those who participated in the past crimes. According to the country's law, nobody was indicted without verifying evidence collected against that individual. Similarly, the verification procedures could take time delaying the trial of any individuals, added the delegation.

The delegation said that the genocidal regime of the Khmer Rouge was stopped in January 1979 and from 15 to 19 August 1979 a Cambodian court had processed a judgement against the ancient regime. Although the judgement of the court had not been recognized by the international community, the investigations, the inquiries, the testimonies and the other material evidence could still be valid.

Turning to a question of gender discrimination, the delegation said that Cambodian law did not provide any form of discrimination against women. Throughout society, women held honourable positions both in the family and in society itself; they were appreciated and cherished by all members of the Cambodian society. During the last three years, among the 100,000 persons employed by different labour forces, 80 per cent were women. In addition, four political parties aiming at promoting the cause of the women had been formed and had participated in the 1998 national election. Although they did not win seats, their future was encouraging, said the delegation.

Asked if a secret prison existed in Cambodia, the delegation said that there was not such a prison in the country. As regards torture, the law prohibited such treatment.Any State agent who maltreated persons under his/her authority would be liable for his/her acts. In the Prey Veng province, for instance, a police officer who slapped a suspect had been dismissed from his post and imprisoned for his act; and a district police inspector in the province of Kampong Cham had been charged for detaining an individual for more than 48 hours, which was the legal limit of time to keep a suspect in a police custody before being presented to a judge.

Responding to a question regarding the situation of prostitution in the country, the delegation said that the Government had surveyed the existence of 35,000 prostitutes in the whole country, earning annually $22 million. According to the delegation, it was discovered that half of the revenue obtained by the prostitutes went to support their families in the countryside. In order to fight that phenomenon, the Government had spent $3 million without any immediate effect to decrease the number of those women involved in prostitution. Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the Ministry of Health had been involved in the fight to prevent the spread of the HIV-AIDS virus by launching awareness raising programmes.

Asked if measures had been taken to halt the excessive use of lethal weapons by police and security forces when trying to apprehend suspects, the delegation said that any attempt to kill or any act of manslaughter was a criminal act to be punished by law. In addition, all firearms possessed be they legal or illegal were confiscated. During the past, 60,000 weapons were confiscated, including one possessed by the Prime Minister, which was kept in a museum.

With regard to measures being taken to ensure strict observance of the arrest warrant requirements and the time limits of pre-trial detention necessary to comply with the provision of the Covenant, the delegation affirmed that at present, the limit did not go over six months before the case was transmitted to courts. In the case of drug trafficking, some detainees could remain behind bars beyond six months while their cases still remained under investigation. If the detention was not justified by supporting evidence, complaints could be lodged by individuals claiming compensation for their unjustified detention.

Concerning the use of shackles and chains used on prisoners, the delegation said that the Ministries of Interior, Justice and Health, had issued a joint order in 1993, prohibiting the use of shackles and chains on detainees and placing all detention centres under their supervision. The Chief Procecutor had to inspect prisons to verify that chains were not used against detainees. Nevertheless, handcuffs could be used in certain circumstances where a prisoner was found conspiring to evade from his cell or to guarantee the security of other prisoners if the prisoner had a violent attitude.

According to the statement made by the Cambodian officials in response to written questions prepared in advance by Committee members, freedom of the press was considerable in the country. However, private radio and television stations were not allowed to transmit statements or propaganda with respect to political parties.

A number of Committee experts, reacting to the delegation's assurance that press was free, said that the situation was not as alleged by the Government officials. They said that journalists were prosecuted for expressing their opinion; and the general situation was not totally favourable to exercise freedom of the press. However, the delegation said that some newspapers grossly violated the interests of others.