What do you think of Seng Theary's statement?

 "Were all Khmer Rouge involved in killings to be tried, the country could see instability, Seng Theary said, echoing concerns of Prime Minister Hun Sen and other Cambodian court officials."

Tribunal Complainant Urges Healing

http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2010/03/tribunal-complainant-urges-healing.html

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

How so, Ms. Theary Seng, please?

I don't know what to think.  She don't want to tried all the killers and is satisfied with how the KRT is opening door for victims to talk and not concern about real justice.  She said the same thing when I talked to her last year.  WTF?

She is totally playing into Hun Sen's card.  Instability, instability, instability and instability.  WTF?

Samdech Hun Sen Has provided great stability to Cambodia for 30 years now. The only way the "stability"will change is if the government does and I don't reckon that's going to happen any day soon.

It’s the same thing as saying: If Hun Sen and the CPP lose the election then there will be war and instability.

People are willingly allowed this view to prevail in Cambodia.

ECCC should be scraped it’s a humiliation for Cambodians. It tries only the losers, they (KR, Vietnamese, Chinese, Americans) were in it all together in creating hell in Cambodia.

The election should be scraped indefinitely – keep the incumbent in power for stability sake as things run seamlessly.

Finally just wait and hope for the best and survey new boundaries of Cambodia and re-deposit it with the UN. This should be done every fifty years.

If I understand this designate trial correcty it is taking place in Cambodia. Hun Sen and China's involvement protested the trial taking place in another country for it will publicly reveal and officically publish in the final outcome, cheeky bastards.

You posted part of her quotes out of the context, the part your highlighted in bold in my opinion her speech may have beyond meanings. Notice, she said ALL and that not all Khmer Rouge murderers are residing in Cambodia " echoeing concerns for HS'' can means he feared those in trial will testify will involved his name or it's a hectic task brinng in all those involves for  fair trial.  Or maybe she's wise to not endangering her life and those around her as she's in the public spotlight by not negatively depicting him. 

Excuse me! Consider a few thing here. Even she wanted to, does she have the authority? What about the costs? Remember this is taking place in Cambodia where money talks bullshit walks.

Maybe Seng should stick to writing, where someone can edit her comments before publication.  I find her statement below to be lacking also. 

“I wish to encourage and ask our brothers and sisters to release their anger through monitoring, expressing their opinion from the bottoms of their hearts,” she said. “Don’t use violence, but turn our violence into release through legal protests, as the existing right of people living in a society moving toward democracy.”

Where does this woman live?  Cambodia or America?  If Cambodia, then how can she talk about "legal protest" and "society moving toward democracy."  Does she not realize public protest is deterred (unless orchestrated by the Hun Sen) and that Cambodia is and has been moving AWAY from democracy?  I hope she is not caving under Cambodian Parasite Party pressure like Mu Sochua's lawyer.

One of the comments posted -

Ms. Theary Seng, you are bunch of phylosophy! Bullshit!

You keep saying for the citizens to use legal democracy in Cambodia. Who are you speaking for? Hun Sen, the perpetraitor or Cambodian citizens, the victims?

It has been almost three decades! Diplomatic methods will not work against the rival gang, Hun Sen.

Now it got to the point that you must use fire to put out fire. Cambodians have try to use water for so long and obviously it has not work. If people keep doing the same thing then don't expect different result.

You one of the smart ass lawyer who street brawl fight with the street gang in their territory. Who you think will win? By the time law inforcement (assuming the officer is not one of them) arrived you and your colleagues will be dead. What make it worst for Cambodia because all law officials is the perpetraitor, directly or indirectly. This is why Hun Sen still in power today!

Ethics, rules and laws only good to resolve with who respect them.

In italic font, has there been a history of the Khmer Americans were up in arms protesting about such issue? I think not. Being a publish writer and an involver in the Khmer Roughe trial she is wise  discouraging Cambodian natioanals to not partake violence but the only mean is to voice and showing our displeasure via protest (not that it'll happen or make an impact). Do you have a better thought?

Theary Seng's reply

http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2010/03/theary-sengs-reply.html

with author Chanrithy Him at the National Press Club (Washington, DC, 5 March 2010).

Please find below Ms. Theary Seng's reply to the following question asked by one KI-Media Reader:

The Khmer Rouge Tribunal (or formally, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, ECCC) can only provide “symbolic”, “proximate” and “selective” justice, not perfect, comprehensive justice.

To try only 5 (with the real possibility of an even more narrow possibility of Duch being the sole scapegoat!) is not enough; to try everyone—which could be in the thousands theoretically—is not practical, realistic or beneficial to the country; it works against reconciliation and would cause social and political instability.

There is no magic number of how many should be tried; an additional five to the existing five is not unreasonable. What is unacceptable is when politics interfere in the process and the Prime Minister acts as the prosecutor and the Judge.

The ECCC is a court of law which as a legal mechanism is greatly limited in its ability to provide legal accountability. 

First of all, any court of law is limited by its narrow mandate to convict or to let go based on available evidence. And the limitations are further circumscribed by rules of procedure, evidentiary rules, courtroom decorum, arcane language/legalese and other fair trial rights.

Second, in addition to the general limitations, the ECCC is even more limited by the 30-year old evidence (lost, compromised or witnesses are dead or too fearful to come forward), charges of corruption, political interference, scope of the crimes and magnitude of crime scene, 3 different official languages, natural and ill-will delays etc.

Currently, the ECCC is detaining five individuals:

• (i) Case File 001: Duch under “those most responsible”, which has gone to trial and we are now awaiting the verdict, expected within the next several days; and
• (ii) Case File 002: Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, Ieng Sary and Ieng Thirith under “senior Khmer Rouge leaders”, whose trial is expected to start early next year 2011.

Before he left the ECCC, the international co-prosecutor Robert Petit pushed for the prosecution of an additional 5 individuals which the Cambodian co-prosecutor Chea Leang blocked. The issue went to the Pre-Trial Chamber which required a “super-majority” to block this matter form moving forward; that is to say, it needed one of the 2 international judges to vote to block this issue from going forward, which did not happen. These five individuals would comprise Case File 003 and Case File 004.

However, Prime Minister Hun Sen has expressly blocked this possibility: "If the court wants to charge more former senior Khmer Rouge cadres, [it] must show the reasons to Prime Minister Hun Sen” referring to himself in the third person. The political interference of the Prime Minister Hun Sen in this regard is unacceptable.

I am a bit swamped to provide a more detailed response than the above. But hopefully soon, I will have time to refine my outline from the various talks I’ve been giving at the World Bank and the National Press Club here in Washington, DC on the ECCC to shed further light on the matter.
____________
Theary C. SENG, from Washington, DC. temporarily

hi n1985,

Your comment is very valid.

Yes, I did notice that she said "all" but I preferred to leave her statement verbatim without changing "all" to CAPS. 

When I started the thread, I also felt that the VOA journalist misrepresented Seng Theary's opinion when he said " echoing concerns of Prime Minister Hun Sen and other Cambodian court officials."

Seng Theary would be among the last people to agree with Hun Sen or echo Hun Sen’s views on almost anything. 

IMO, we must accept the financial and logistical impossibility of identifying and prosecuting ALL former KRs who have killed, some of whom are abroad (and need to be extradited).

This is classic comment.  I like how they peacefully suggested to live her life and forget and turn away from the issues

Dear Theary,

As much as I admire your conviction for the nation, I am of the same opinion as poster 8:54PM. I, too, experienced the horrible KR regime, and those painful memories and tragedy will remain with me for the rest of my life. That being said, I believe it is time to move on. We should not let the past held us captive. In my opinion, our times would be well spent by living and accomplishing goals that are relevant and more important to the present rather than by reminiscing the past terrible tragedy.

Wish you all the best, and hope in the near future you’ll find a true soul mate to share all the wonders life has to offer.

Khmer Academy

KSaron,

Actually, this comment you quoted

Pales in comparison with these.

http://khmer.cc/community/t.c?b=13&t=5520&m=86889

n1985,

I agree that violence will solve nothing in this case, only because the Hun Sen's opponents are not militarily powerful enough yet to do anything.  Maybe if in the 1997 coup the coward Rannaridh did not flee and instead stayed and encouraged his troops to fight, the CPP lock on power could have been broken.  This is a big MAYBE.  But it is the only time I can think of when the opposition had even a fighting chance.  Since then the Parasite party's grip on power is stronger and corruption worse.

My objection is to Seng's premise that legal protests are possible and that Cambodia is a society moving toward democracy.  Neither is true nor possible so why encourage it?  If my neighbor is starving, I can tell him that he should eat.  But if he has no access to food, why bother making such an empty statement?

Just look in the real world in the international stage. The legal process alone cannot and will never work without the muscle of force behind it. In the case where the parties have comparable strength they choose to negotiate as it dictates by human instinct that they don't want to die. In the case where one side has the advantage of the overwhelming force, Law becomes rubbish and rubber stamp.

Foreign countries they put their national interests first. They deal only with the guy that has the guns, that is Mr Hun Sen (CPP).

People can preach about Law in Cambodia until the white saliva builds up at their mouths' edges and it smells sting, Hun Sen doesn't give a damn because the donors don't give a sh#t about it while they know fully well of what's going on.

Solution:

1. Wait for time to take care of him – old age syndrome. Go along with the flow.

Or

2. Neutralize him with force.

HI PRL,

In July 1997, the FUNCINPEC-aligned troops were no match against the Vietnamese troops disguised as CPP troops.

The best time to meet the CPP head on was straight after the FUNCINPEC’ s victory in 1993, when UNTAC troops were still around. To be fair to Ranariddh, in 1993, he did not want to share power with the CPP but, unfortunately, had no choice but to listen to his father Sihanouk who floated the idea of Sihanouk as Head of State, assisted by two Prime Ministers (funcinpec and CPP) before the election result was announced, thereby entertaining the idea of a coalition government. When two Eastern provinces led by CPP officials, including Ranariddh’s half-brother, Chakrapong, threatened to secede, instead of calling them and the CPP bluff and calling on UNTAC to intervene, Sihanouk convinced Ranariddh to “share power” with the CPP. Since UNTAC was the government and had troops in place, bluff should have been called, at the risk of a resumption of the civil war.

In 1998 and then 2004, the lure of power and especially money was such that Ranariddh and Funcinpec abandoned the Sam Rainsy party again and again. The rest is history, including the ratification of the Supplementary Border Treaty with Vietnam.

Given the recent prison sentence imposed on Sam Rainsy for “inciting racial hatred”, you can hardly expect a Seng Theary who intends to come back to Cambodia to mouth anything better than platitudes or self-serving or peer-serving statements such as “Public forums organized by the center that I moderated and by other civil society organizations are working as a bridge for the court to provide important updates from the court to public,” http://ki-media.blogspot.com/2010/03/tribunal-bringing-about-healing.html

or anything better than the usual US clichéd phrase of

The Khmer Rouge Tribunal: Transforming Cambodian “survivors/subjects” into informed, empowered “citizens”

PRL, legal protests are possible in Cambodia, provided they are judged to be legal by the authorities.

If all protests were put down, mass protests by garment factory workers, evictees would not have been possible.

On the other hand, any demonstration to protest the lifting of SRP deputies’ parliamentary immunity or Sam Rainsy’s sentencing or anything to do with the border issue with Vietnam would be savagely put down before the protest could even gather 10 demonstrators.

IMO, your analogy of “Neither is true nor possible so why encourage it?  If my neighbor is starving, I can tell him that he should eat.  But if he has no access to food, why bother making such an empty statement?”, is not quite valid.

IMO, Seng Theary’s statement is not quite empty or irresponsible but one has to question the soundness of the advice in terms of effectiveness.