I will be a guest on Radio Free Asia

with chief of ECCC Public Affairs Reach Sambath

to discuss Cases 003 and 004

tonight, Friday, 22 April 2011

7:45 - 8:30 p.m. in RFA Phnom Penh studio

Theary Seng, RFA Phnom Penh studio, 22 April 2011

During the 40-45 minute program, ECCC Reach Sambath confirmed that the ECCC Victims Support Section forwarded my application to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges, which the co-investigating judges received today (Friday, April 22).  He also confirmed on air that I did NOT violate any ECCC rules, but he nonetheless asked the people to be patient with the ECCC (esp the co-investigating judges) and to be "aut-tmuot" (patient resignation, almost as if a request for the people to let go of the matter).

- Theary Seng, April 23 morning

RFA Call-in Show guests ECCC public affairs chief Reach Sambath, civil party applicant Theary Seng and RFA host Leng Maly (RFA Phnom Penh, 22 April 2011)

Audio in KI-Media.  More Photos . . .

In response to the rumor being spread that I am hiding overseas (in US) - LIES! I am very much at home in Phnom Penh; I am not scheduled to travel overseas till end of April and end of June.

The Khmer Rouge drove me, a child of 4 years old, from my Phnom Penh home once in 1975, and then again as ac child of 9 years old in 1979 to seek asylum in a 3rd country.  But as a 40+ year old adult, even this billion-dollar empowered new Khmer Rouge will not be able to drive me a 3rd time from my Phnom Penh - without my consent and a fight.

Yes, that is me at Metro Phnom Penh on 20 April 2011, showing off my new chin-length hair-chop to fend off  the April inferno.

ECCC timeline, 17 April 2011

(in KI Media)

ECCC Overview Diagram, 17 April 2011

(in KI-Media)

ECCC Victim Information Form

(Civil Party application in Khmer / English / French)

Theary Seng with lawyer Choung Chou-Ngy taking calls on Hello VOA, Phnom Penh studio, 11 April 2011

Cases 003/004 civil party applicant Theary Seng

and lawyer CHOUNG Chou-Ngy

as guests on Hello VOA

to discuss how victims can file NOW

Monday night, 11 April 2011, from 8:50 - 9:20 p.m. (Cambodia time)

ECCC (both UN/Khmer Spokesmen

in pre-recorded interviews a few hours prior to the show

did an ABOUT-FACE,

saying now that VICTIMS CAN FILE ANYTIME

in cases 003/004 !!

I wish VOA in its reporting of the call-in show had emphasized this fact more.  VICTORY for us victims... NOW, to push the co-investigating judges (CIJs) to start doing the investigation and release information, so we victims who want to apply can put in a more strong application to become civil parties and to assist them with investigation.

“As a victim, my client has the full right to file her complaint to the court at any time to seek justice,” said Choung Chou-Ngy, Seng Theary’s attorney for the tribunal, who was also a guest on the show. And while tribunal officials say it is true complainants can file anytime, the court has not released the identities of the suspects [excerpt from VOA reporting].

In KI-Media

On the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE principle, see my ECCC response letter to Phnom Penh Post editor, 13 April 2011 (scroll down).

"About-Face" (180-degree reversal of position) of ECCC

by P.T. in KI Media

UN spokesman Lars Olsen

Cambodian spokesman Reach Sambath

. . . . .

Case 003/004 "Charged Persons"

Meas Muth and Sou Met

named in PUBLIC documents

This OCIJ Order D298/2 "Order refusing request for further charging" in KI Media

Glossary of ECCC Internal Rules (rev. 7, 23 Feb. 2011) "the Charged Person" refers to:

"any person who is subject to prosecution in a particular case, during the period between the Introductory Submission and Indictment or dismissal of the case."

Footnote 6: "Any person named in the Introductory Submission is referred to as 'the Charged Person'... any person named in the introductory submission, even when referred to as 'X appearing to be...', is automatically a charged person, regardless of the date on which he or she is notified of the charges by the investigating judges'."

In Sept. 2009, the Office of Co-Prosecutors forwarded the Introductory Submission (the "charging instrument") for Cases 003 and 004 to the Co-Investigating Judges, making Meas Muth, Sou Met et al at that moment in time "Charged Persons."

"Charged Persons" Meas Muth, Sou Met, Im Chaem

named in the media:

-  Compilation in KI Media, 9 April 2011

-  3 of 7 Khmer Rouge Suspects Deny Killings (Kyodo, 20 July 2001)

-  Khmer Rouge Torture Chief Faces "Killing Fields" Tribunal (UK Daily Mail, 31 July 2007)

-  War Crimes Panel Charges Khmer Rouge Chief (UK Guardian, 1 Aug. 2007)

-  Meas Muth, Ta Mok's Son-in-Law, Might Face Arrest
(Moneaksekar Khmer, 17 Jan. 2008)

-  Meas Muth Not Care about ECCC Actions (Moneaksekar Khmer, 29 Jan. 2008

-  Indict No More: Former Rebel Commander
(VOA Khmer, 25 March 2009)

-  Prosecutions of more than five existing KR leaders not only difficult in finding justice, but also fueling instability, says Meas Muth (Rasmei Kampuchea, 21 April 2009)

-  Tribunal Moves on Additional Inquiries
(Phnom Penh Post, 3 Sept. 2009)

-  Former Khmer Rouge Questions Indictment (VOA, 7 Sept. 2009)

-  Indictments Hint at Tribunal Independence: Scholar
(VOA Khmer, 9 Sept. 2009)

-  No more than 10 former Members of the KR will be Prosecuted before ECCC, International Justice Tribune, (Thierry Cruvellier, 17 Sept. 2009)

-  Questions Linger over more Tribunal Indictments
(VOA Khmer, 18 Sept. 2009)

-  Cadres Face Prospect of More Arrests (Phnom Penh Post, 10 Nov. 2009)

-  The Cambodia Daily, 1 Dec. 2010

* * *

-  VOA interview Charged Person Im Chaem, 10 Sept. 2009

-  An ex-KR claims the Right to be Forgotten (Le Monde, 29 Sept. 2009)

- Le Monde Suggests Im Chem is a Suspect (Phnom Penh Post, 4 Oct. 2009)

-  Last Khmer Rouge to Defect Discuss Reconciliation
(VOA, 16 April 2010)

-  Question of Further Indictments Continues to Hang over Tribunal
(VOA Khmer, 13 Aug. 2010)

-  Cambodian Reconciliation Efforts Force Khmer Rouge Veterans to Confront the Past
(The Washington Post, 2 Dec. 2010)

"Charged Persons" Meas Muth and Sou Met

named in published research papers, books

by scholars and international lawyers:

-  Seven Candidates for Prosecution: Accountability for Crimes of the Khmer Rouge (excerpts on "Charged Persons" Meas Muth and Sou Met), by Prof. Stephen Heder and international lawyer Brian D. Tittemore (War Crimes Research Office, American University, June 2001)

-  Getting Away with Genocide (Dr. Helen Jarvis, Tom Fawthrop, 2005) naming "Charged Persons" Meas Muth and Sou Met (Excerpts in KI Media, 9 April 2011)

List cont'd . . .

. . . . .

Letters to the Editor

"Cheap Justice for Poor KR Victims

at Hundred-Million-Dollar UN-backed Court"

Phnom Penh, 7 April 2011

______________

The Phnom Penh Post, 7 April 2011

The U.N.fair Justice? (pun intended)

by KI Media

Cheap Justice Afoot at the Extraordinary Chambers

By Theary C. SENG

in KI Media

Dear Editor of The Phnom Penh Post:

I write in response to statements made by tribunal spokesman Lars Olsen in the article entitled Former Cadres in Complaint (Phnom Penh Post, 4 April 2011) which I find simultaneously perplexing and amusing, highly offensive, extremely misleading, and completely incorrect in his understanding of legal procedure:

United Nations court spokesman Lars Olsen called Theary Seng’s allegations premature and irresponsible. “The court will not be bullied into confirming or denying speculation about a confidential investigation… This is a reckless act which shows a complete disregard for judicial due process and principles of law.”

Mr. Olsen is responding to the filing of my application to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges via the Victims Support Section as a civil party in Cases 003/004 against former Khmer Rouge military commanders Meas Muth and Sou Met in the Extraordinary Chambers (ECCC).

First, Mr. Olsen’s use of the phrase “the court will not be bullied” is not only unfortunate but deeply perplexing and outright amusing. I expect these words from the Cambodian personnel but not the UN spokesman of the Extraordinary Chambers which purports to give victims a greater historic voice as “Civil Parties”. Also, it was the courageous UN prosecutor Robert Petit who initiated at great energy Cases 003/004. Instead of encouraging us in this regard, Mr. Olsen employs theatrical language to ridicule and undermine.

I had to chuckle upon reading these words as images arise of a petite Cambodian woman in stilettos intimidating the hundred-million-dollar institution situated on a military compound of flowing robed judges, vainglorious prosecutors and high-minded lawyers with their 6-figure salaries, possessing all the knowledge, all the power of information and resources under the banner emblazoned loudly “UN”.

I have been forthright in stating that in addition to the main reason of demanding a greater measure of justice in honorable, loving memory of my parents, my relatives and the lives of 1,700,000 (please do not shorten to 1.7 M and keep in the zeros), I am lodging this complaint publicly in hope to give life to these Cases of 003/004 made dormant by overt political interference and UN lethargy.

For too long, the ECCC Office of Co-Investigating Judges has hidden behind the all-encompassing, impenetrable black veil of confidentiality even with individuals who have the legitimate right to know, e.g. lawyers of victim civil parties sworn to confidentiality by nature of their profession.

In using “bullied”, maybe Mr. Olsen misspoke; maybe, he really unconsciously meant to attribute it to his hundred-million-dollar institution, five years later still celebrating the one victory of Case 001, a cakewalk with mounds of evidence and of one non-senior-KR man who confessed and cooperated.

Second, in calling my application which named KR military commanders Meas Muth and Sou Met “irresponsible” and “reckless” Mr. Olsen misleads the public to believe that I and other victims do not have a right to file our applications now. To the contrary, it is this Extraordinary Chambers that gives us victims this right to file as a civil party. At any point in the criminal proceeding. Now, as explained in my next third point.

Mr. Olsen has it backward; I would be “irresponsible” if I do not file. Genuine justice and honorable memory demand that I file.

Third, Mr. Olsen is legally incorrect about the ECCC procedural process as to when I can file as a civil party in the ECCC in calling my application “premature” and “a complete disregard for judicial due process and principles of law.”

Basically, as part of the agreement between the Royal Government of Cambodia and the UN, this ECCC uses the procedure of the Cambodian national civil law system which says a victim can file to become a civil party at any point during the criminal proceeding. Oftentimes, it is the victims who initiate the criminal proceeding against the alleged perpetrator(s) who is (are) sometimes unknown to the victims.

The ECCC Internal Rules (IR) supplements on procedural matters unique to the ECCC where the foundational national procedural law is inadequate or silent. Here, the most updated IR of February 2011 is silent on when a victim can file to become a civil party and has favorable provisions which suggest that the victims can file during this investigative phase of Cases 003/004.

The Glossary at the end of the Feb. 2011 Internal Rules defines a "Charged Person” as “any person who is subject to prosecution in a particular case, during the period between the Introductory Submission and Indictment or dismissal of the case."

Application and Admission of Civil Parties Rule23bis.2. A Victim who wishes to be joined as a Civil Party shall submit such application in writing no later than fifteen (15)  days [a deadline, not when a civil party can file] after the Co-Investigating Judges notify the parties of the conclusion of the judicial investigation pursuant to IR 66(1).

Judicial Investigations Rule 55.10. “At any time during an investigation, the Co-Prosecutors, a Charged Person or a Civil Party may request the Co-Investigating Judges to make such orders or undertake such investigative action as they consider useful for the conduct of the investigation.”

The Office of Co-Prosecutors has forwarded the Introductory Submission on Cases 003/004 to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges (after ruling by Pre-Trial Chamber over conflict between national and international co-prosecutors). The Cases are now under investigation by the OCIJ, but unfortunately only by the UN personnel and even then very tepidly due to political interference and international fatigue.

In filing, I am showing the highest respect for the law, even if it runs contrary to the UN and Cambodian politics of spin.

Through his charged words and tone, is Mr. Olsen telling me and Cambodian victims to settle for cheap justice? That cheap justice is all the ECCC can provide us and we should be satisfied with the crumbs handed our way in silence and with gratitude as it’s better than the Khmer Rouge years? That there are two types of justice: one for Cambodians and one for the people of the developed world? That we should accept the fiction being written by this ECCC with regards to Cases 003/004?

In sum, the comments made by UN spokesman Lars Olsen send a deeply chilling message to victims of the Khmer Rouge who could and would want to file as civil parties. The statements are not only perplexing, offensive, misleading and legally incorrect but attempt to pre-empt my application and those of potential other applicants by silencing our voices and to obstruct our pursuit of justice in Cases 003/004. In this light, it raises an interesting question as to who here really is “reckless”, showing a “complete disregard” for the law and “bullying” who.

"The Bully"

The Scapegoat War Criminal, the one victory for ECCC 5 years later of a non-Senior-KR-Leader who confessed.

Response to Theary Seng

from ECCC [Lars Olsen]

(The Phnom Penh Post editorial, 8 April 2011), re-post in KI Media

* * *

Theary Seng's Response to ECCC 8 April 2011's Response

(above link)

"ECCC/UN asleep, hiding behind veil of confidentiality"

published in The Phnom Penh Post editorial

Wednesday, 13 April 2011 (immediately before Khmer New Year)

Repost in KI-Media

Longer unpublished 2,400-word version here

and in KI-Media, 13 April 2011

ECCC/UN Asleep, Hiding behind Veil of Confidentiality

By Theary C. SENG

Published Wednesday, 13 April 2011 (immediately before Khmer new year)

Dear Editor of The Phnom Penh Post:

I read UN spokesman Lars Olsen’s response to my April 7 letter published in The Phnom Penh Post on 8 April 2011 with grave concern for his persistent, intentional misinterpretation of procedural provisions which clearly favor victims to file now as civil parties in Cases 003 and 004.

It is the role of the co-investigating judges ("CIJs"), not Mr. Olsen, to determine whether my application pass legal muster on two grounds – procedural and substantive.  Here, I address only the procedural ground in response to Mr. Olsen’s highly charged accusations of “premature” timing, “irresponsible and reckless” breach of confidentiality and its relation to the well-established principle of the presumption of innocence (“PoI”).

Mr. Olsen is deliberately “missing the point” on procedural matters in regard to (i) timing, and (ii) confidentiality.

1. TIMING. Based on national procedure and ECCC Internal Rules (“IR”), a victim can attach herself to a criminal proceeding as a complainant or civil party at any time. As the matters stand now, Meas Muth and Sou Met are “Charged Persons” as defined by the CIJs. Mr. Olsen is legally incorrect to refer to the five individuals in the Introductory Submission as “suspects”, because anyone named as a suspect in the Introductory Submission is automatically considered a legally “Charged Person” whether they have been publicly named or not, according to an Office of CIJ Order D298/2, esp. fn. 6.

[ OCIJ Order D298/2 ]

In Sept. 2009, the UN prosecutor forwarded the Introductory Submission (the "charging instrument") for Cases 003/004 to the CIJs, making Meas Muth, Sou Met et al at that moment in time "Charged Persons."  Hence, the five individuals of Cases 003/004 are already "Charged Persons" clearly within the IR definition. To consider them to be lesser "suspects" minimizes the stage at which this investigation is supposed to be. Victims should have been able to file applications for Civil Party status from the moment of the filing of the Introductory Submission. The CIJs are under an obligation to provide the public with enough information to file an IR 23bis application, which they are recklessly disregarding in Cases 003/004 for the last 19 months.

2. CONFIDENTIALITY. The names I mentioned have already been widely circulated and it is ridiculous to say that I am revealing “confidential” information. It is not confidential, I did not get access to it as a result of being a party to the court proceeding, and I am under no obligation to keep silent about who I think is responsible for a crime.

In this light, the ECCC is deliberately hiding behind the all-encompassing, impenetrable veil of confidentiality and imperialistically abusing its power of transparency and accountability. The Office of CIJs has been sitting idly on Cases 003/004 for the last 19 months (!) with no meaningful activity. For the last seven months since the Closing Order of Case 002, its 40-member staff have been collecting salaries in the conservative range of US$250,000 per month for doing absolutely nothing, as the investigations of Cases 001 and 002 are completed and there is no discernable activity for Cases 003/004. The stalling from overt political interference has been so outrageous, sustained and deep that one can hear the CIJs snoring under their cloak of secrecy against the backdrop of the deafening silence of the donor community.

By attempting to shut me up, the ECCC is furthering its abuse of the rights of victims and covering up its failure to follow the law and investigate Cases 003/004 with integrity.

3.  PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE: I am a victim (not a neutral observer or a judicial officer) alleging serious criminal charges against Meas Muth and Sou Met. I am not the only victim, but one among millions with the same right to make public allegations about our injuries and claims. The problem with mass crimes is that they produce majority victims in the minority public with the right to speak publicly about their claims and other available information (publications of the last 35 years!). In accusing me of “mere speculation” with “no basis”, Mr. Olsen is asking me and other victims to suspend our reason, logic and knowledge of these materials relevant to our cases.

Mr. Olsen is mistaking the right of mass victims with obligations of the court officials and minority unaffected public; this is not a simple murder in the local neighborhood by which the PoI principle is to be viewed through a very narrow local lens without incorporating the countless distinguishing factors associated with mass crimes of international renown.

In sum, Mr. Olsen is again clearly, misleadingly, legally INCORRECT on the procedural law of timing and confidentiality and attempts to hide the outrageous circumstances of Cases 003/004 behind the cloak of confidentiality by imbuing the CIJs with imperialistic powers, unchallenged. As victims, we have the right to know, to apply as civil parties and the interests to demand a more satisfactory measure of justice than the current cheap, fabricated version vis-à-vis Cases 003/004 for our loved ones lost. (As an aside, I am curious to know why Mr. Olsen thinks my application is a “pretext”, “irresponsible”, “reckless” which “bullied” and showed a complete disregard for the law, while Mr. Rob Hamill’s same application is only “unfortunate”?)

An impassioned Theary Seng pursuing her right to file in light of ECCC's veil of confidentiality, but winning the first round in getting the ECCC to do an ABOUT-FACE on Hello VOA in stating that victims can apply AT ANY TIME to become civil parties in Cases 003/004.  Sacravatoon, 13 April 2011.

. . . . .

Cheap Justice for Cambodians at the UN-backed Court

By Theary C. SENG, 6 April 2011

in KI Media

Dear Editor of The Cambodia Daily:

I write in response to statements made by tribunal spokesmen Lars Olsen and Reach Sambath in the article entitled Before Charges, Activist Cites Two in a Dormant KR Inquest (The Cambodia Daily, 4 April 2011) and Activist Tries to File Civil Party Application in Case 003 (The Cambodia Daily, 5 April 2011) which I find simultaneously perplexing and amusing, highly offensive, extremely misleading, and completely incorrect in their understanding of legal procedure:

Lars Olsen, legal communications officer for the tribunal, said yesterday that Ms. Seng’s actions were “reckless” and showed “a complete disregard for judicial due process and principles of law… The court will not be bullied into confirming or denying speculations about a confidential investigation” (4 April 2011).

“Theary Seng, if she claims she is a lawyer, she should also read the Internal Rules of the court, and then she will know what she can do and what she cannot do,” tribunal spokesman Reach Sambath said yesterday, adding that he could not confirm that the complaint had been received (5 April 2011).

Mr. Olsen and Mr. Sambath are responding to the filing of my application to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges via the Victims Support Section as a civil party in Cases 003/004 against former Khmer Rouge military commanders Meas Muth and Sou Met in the Extraordinary Chambers (ECCC), which VSS chief Mr. Rong Chhorng confirmed its receipt (via email and hand-delivery by lawyer Choung Chou-Ngy) by telephone to me this Wednesday morning.

First, Mr. Olsen’s use of the phrase “the court will not be bullied” is not only unfortunate but deeply perplexing and outright amusing. I expect these words from the Cambodian personnel but not the UN spokesman of the Extraordinary Chambers which purports to give victims a greater historic voice as “Civil Parties”. Also, it was the courageous UN prosecutor Robert Petit who initiated at great energy Cases 003/004. Instead of encouraging us in this regard, he employs theatrical language to ridicule and undermine.

I had to chuckle upon reading these words as images arise of a petite Cambodian woman in stilettos intimidating the hundred-million-dollar institution situated on a military compound of flowing robed judges, vainglorious prosecutors and high-minded lawyers with their 6-figure salaries, possessing all the knowledge, all the power of information and resources under the banner emblazoned loudly “UN”.

I have been forthright in stating that in addition to the main reason of demanding a greater measure of justice in honorable, loving memory of my parents, my relatives and the lives of 1,700,000 (please do not shorten to 1.7 M and keep in the zeros), I am lodging this complaint publicly in hope to give life to these Cases of 003/004 made dormant by overt political interference and UN lethargy.

For too long, the ECCC Office of Co-Investigating Judges has hidden behind the all-encompassing, impenetrable black veil of confidentiality even with individuals who have the legitimate right to know, e.g. lawyers of victim civil parties sworn to confidentiality by nature of their profession. In using “bullied”, maybe Mr. Olsen misspoke; maybe, he really unconsciously meant to attribute it to his hundred-million-dollar institution, five years later still celebrating the one victory of Case 001, a cakewalk with mounds of evidence and of one non-senior-KR man who confessed and cooperated.

Second, in calling my application which named KR military commanders Meas Muth and Sou Met “reckless” Mr. Olsen misleads the public to believe that I and other victims do not have a right to file our applications now. To the contrary, it is this Extraordinary Chambers that gives us victims this right to file as a civil party. At any point in the criminal proceeding. Now, as explained in my next point.

Third, both spokesmen Mr. Olsen and Mr. Sambath are legally incorrect about the ECCC procedural process as to when I can file as a civil party in the ECCC: Mr. Olsen in calling my application “premature” and “a complete disregard for judicial due process and principles of law”, and Mr. Sambath in my “claim” to be a lawyer, I should know what I “can and cannot do” upon reading the Internal Rules.

Basically, as part of the agreement between the Royal Government of Cambodia and the UN, this ECCC uses the procedure of the Cambodian national civil law system which says a victim can file to become a civil party at any point during the criminal proceeding. Oftentimes, it is the victims who initiate the criminal proceeding against the alleged perpetrator(s) who is (are) sometimes unknown to the victims.

The ECCC Internal Rules (IR) supplements on procedural matters unique to the ECCC where the foundational national procedural law is inadequate or silent. Here, the most updated IR of February 2011 is silent on when a victim can file to become a civil party and has favorable provisions which suggest that the victims can file during this investigative phase of Cases 003/004.

The Glossary at the end of the Feb. 2011 Internal Rules defines a "Charged Person” as “any person who is subject to prosecution in a particular case, during the period between the Introductory Submission and Indictment or dismissal of the case."

Application and Admission of Civil Parties Rule23bis.2. A Victim who wishes to be joined as a Civil Party shall submit such application in writing no later than fifteen (15) days [a deadline, not when a civil party can file] after the Co-Investigating Judges notify the parties of the conclusion of the judicial investigation pursuant to IR 66(1).

Judicial Investigations Rule 55.10. “At any time during an investigation, the Co-Prosecutors, a Charged Person or a Civil Party may request the Co-Investigating Judges to make such orders or undertake such investigative action as they consider useful for the conduct of the investigation.”

The Office of Co-Prosecutors has forwarded the Introductory Submission on Cases 003/004 to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges (after ruling by Pre-Trial Chamber over conflict between national and international co-prosecutors). The Cases are now under investigation by the OCIJ, but unfortunately only by the UN personnel and even then very tepidly due to political interference and international fatigue.

In filing, I am showing the highest respect for the law, even if it runs contrary to the UN and Cambodian politics of spin.

Through his charged words and tone, is Mr. Olsen telling me and Cambodian victims to settle for cheap justice? That cheap justice is all the ECCC can provide us and we should be satisfied with the crumbs handed our way in silence and with gratitude as it’s better than the Khmer Rouge years? That there are two types of justice: one for Cambodians and one for the people of the developed world? That we should accept the fiction being written by this ECCC with regards to Cases 003/004?

I am perplexed by Mr. Sambath’s acceptance of this cheap justice as he was also orphaned by the Khmer Rouge in Svay Rieng and took refuge with my family in my paternal grandparents’ house in 1978 for some months.

In sum, the comments made in particular by UN spokesman Lars Olsen send a deeply chilling message to victims of the Khmer Rouge who could and would want to file as civil parties. The statements are not only perplexing, offensive, misleading and legally incorrect but attempt to pre-empt my application and those of potential other applicants by silencing our voices and to obstruct our pursuit of justice in Cases 003/004. In this light, it raises an interesting question as to who really here is “reckless”, showing a “complete disregard” for the law and “bullying” who.

Sacravatoon of UNG Bun Heang, 7 April 2011

Cheap Justice for Poor Victims

at Hundred-Million-Dollar Court

By Theary C. SENG, 6 April 2011

(Invited by VOA to discuss this letter on Hello VOA, 11 April 2011)

in KI Media

Dear Editor of VOA Khmer Service:

I write in response to statements made by tribunal spokesman Lars Olsen in the article entitled Complainant Raises Names of More Defendants (VOA, 4 April 2011) which I find highly offensive, extremely misleading, and completely incorrect in his understanding of legal procedure:

“Any names alleged by Theary Seng or anyone else is pure speculation. And to start speculating on names of a confidential investigation under the pretext of being a civil party applicant is irresponsible and reckless and is contradictory to judicial due process.”

Mr. Olsen is responding to the filing of my application to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges via the Victims Support Section as a civil party in Cases 003/004 against former Khmer Rouge military commanders Meas Muth and Sou Met in the Extraordinary Chambers (ECCC).

First, Mr. Olsen’s use of the phrase “the pretext of being a civil party applicant” is not only unfortunate but deeply offensive to any victims of the Khmer Rouge regime, especially coming from the UN spokesman of the Extraordinary Chambers which purports to give victims a greater historic voice as “Civil Parties”.

Here, Mr. Olsen assumes the role of an (amateur) psychologist in assigning an ill, hidden motive to my application. I have been forthright in stating that in addition to the main reason of demanding a greater measure of justice in honorable, loving memory of my parents, my relatives and the lives of 1,700,000 (please do not shorten to 1.7 M but keep in the zeros), I am lodging this complaint publicly in hope to give life to these Cases of 003/004 made dormant by overt political interference and UN lethargy.

For too long, the ECCC Office of Co-Investigating Judges has hidden behind the all-encompassing, impenetrable black veil of confidentiality even with individuals who have the legitimate right to know, e.g. lawyers of victim civil parties sworn to confidentiality by nature of their profession.

In using “pretext”, maybe Mr. Olsen misspoke; maybe, he really unconsciously meant to attribute it to his hundred-million-dollar institution, five years later still celebrating the one victory of Case 001, a cakewalk with mounds of evidence and of one non-senior-KR man who confessed and cooperated.

Second, in calling my application which named KR military commanders Meas Muth and Sou Met “irresponsible”, Mr. Olsen misleads the public to believe that I and other victims do not have a right to file our application now. To the contrary, it is this Extraordinary Chambers that gives us victims this right to file as a civil party. At any point in the criminal proceeding. Now, as explained in my next third point.

Mr. Olsen has it backward; I would be “irresponsible” if I do not file.

Third, Mr. Olsen is legally incorrect about the ECCC procedural process as to when I can file as a civil party in the ECCC. Basically, as part of the agreement between the Royal Government of Cambodia and the UN, this ECCC uses the procedure of the Cambodian national civil law system which says a victim can file to become a civil party at any point during the criminal proceeding. Oftentimes, it is the victims who initiate the criminal proceeding against the alleged perpetrator(s) who is (are) sometimes unknown to the victims.

The ECCC Internal Rules (IR) supplements on procedural matters unique to the ECCC where the foundational national procedural law is inadequate or silent. Here, the most updated IR of February 2011 is silent as to when a victim can file to become a civil party and has favorable provisions which suggest that the victims can file during this investigative phase of Cases 003/004.

The Glossary at the end of the Feb. 2011 Internal Rules defines a "Charged Person” as “any person who is subject to prosecution in a particular case, during the period between the Introductory Submission and Indictment or dismissal of the case."

Application and Admission of Civil Parties Rule23bis.2. A Victim who wishes to be joined as a Civil Party shall submit such application in writing no later than fifteen (15) days [a deadline, not when a civil party can file] after the Co-Investigating Judges notify the parties of the conclusion of the judicial investigation pursuant to IR 66(1).

Judicial Investigations Rule 55.10. “At any time during an investigation, the Co-Prosecutors, a Charged Person or a Civil Party may request the Co-Investigating Judges to make such orders or undertake such investigative action as they consider useful for the conduct of the investigation.”

The Office of Co-Prosecutors has forwarded the Introductory Submission on Cases 003/004 to the Office of Co-Investigating Judges (after ruling by Pre-Trial Chamber over conflict between national and international co-prosecutors). The Cases are now under investigation by the OCIJ, but unfortunately only by the UN personnel and even then very tepidly due to political interference and international fatigue.

In filing, I am showing the highest respect for the law, even if it runs contrary to the UN and Cambodian politics of spin.

Through his charged words and tone, is Mr. Olsen telling me and Cambodian victims to settle for cheap justice? That cheap justice is all the ECCC can provide us and we should be satisfied with the crumbs handed our way in silence and with gratitude as it’s better than the Khmer Rouge years? That there are two types of justice: one for Cambodians and one for the people of the developed world? That we should accept the fiction being written by this ECCC with regards to Cases 003/004?

In sum, the comments made by UN spokesman Lars Olsen send a deeply chilling message to victims of the Khmer Rouge who could and would want to file as civil parties. The statements are not only offensive, misleading and legally incorrect but attempt to pre-empt my application and those of potential other victims by silencing our voices and to obstruct our pursuit of justice in Cases 003/004.

ECCC/UN to Theary Seng, aka Victim Pretender or Applicant Under Pretext:   Act, dress and look like a victim, will ya?  It's too confusing to pity you and have you be our equal.