..........The Pre-Trial Chamber of the Khmer Rouge Court examined on Thursday December 4th the appeal lodged by Khieu Samphan's Defence team regarding the co-Prosecutors' decision to set aside his request for the translation into French of the whole of the case file of the former president of Democratic Kampuchea. The press conference which followed the hearing gave rise to a violent altercation between a victim and Khieu Samphan's Cambodian lawyer and exposed the underlying exasperation of a few victims. A look back at the turbulent episode. Background: the position of the Defence team ..........Khieu Samphan's lawyers refuse to go any further in the proceedings, believing their client's rights are being flouted. At the heart of the problem, as reminded by French co-lawyer Jacques Vergès, lie “tens of thousands of documents [in Khmer] – some 60,000 – which are not being translated”. He pointed out that “our attention has been drawn to the fact that part of the documents has been translated into English and French”. However, to the French lawyer, the translated documents only represent 10% of the whole case file. “I cannot turn my fellow [Cambodian] co-lawyer into an interpretor, he has other things to do!” An offended and willingly provocative Jacques Vergès then added: “We are being told that we can ask for the translation of other pieces, but that is taking people for fools! How can one ask to select texts that we cannot read!” He also rejected Case Law proceedings dealt with by other international criminal courts, which were quoted in the hearing by the co-Prosecutors and which to him are nothing else than “cases where Common Law applies [...] when what prevails here is the French and Cambodian system of inquisitorial proceedings”. Jacques Vergès claimed he accepted to “collaborate”, as requested by the co-Prosecutors, provided he is given the means to do so. Vilifying the tribunal about its inefficiency and wondering about the use of funding, especially funds coming from France (“almost 5 million dollars!”), he also argued about threats he claimed to have received from members of the Prosecution. Cracking the whip, he dared the co-Prosecutors to sue him. The lawyer, seemingly in the midst of a fit of anger that led him to mumble, said that such an attitude would lead them straight to “fame”! Furthermore, he criticised the Pre-Trial Chamber for having urged Khieu Samphan to choose someone other than his French lawyer for his defence, earlier this year. “A Court that advises a client to change their lawyer, in fifteen centuries of History, is a never before seen situation in France!” The civil parties v. lawyer altercation As members of the tribunal urged him to give way to the co-Prosecutors, Jacques Vergès' words turned into a flood as he climbed on his high and uppity horse, trying to pick a quarrel with the magistrates, patiently waiting for their turn to speak in the hearing. It is at that point that a victim lost all patience. To start with, the person, a woman, had been put off by Khieu Samphan's words during the hearing – the 77 year-old showed surprise about the charges of crimes against humanity held against him, and precised vehemently that he had always worked for the good of his country – and started criticising the lawyers, having a serious bone to pick with them. “They keep talking together and they are not letting us speak! This is not confrontation we want. We, victims, have come here to find out the historical truth and inform the media of the sufferings we have been through during the Khmer Rouge regime, and to know how many people have been killed! Hey, you, Khieu Samphan's lawyer, don't go away, I want to ask you a question!” “Do not use this phrase [going away]!”, the Cambodian co-lawyer Sa Sovan retorted shrilly. “If Khieu Samphan has killed, I am not responsible for that!” “I did not say you were going away, I am asking you to stay! My parents died under the Khmer Rouge regime, and you, you are defending [Khieu Samphan]!!!”, the woman replied, more and more infuriated by the whole situation. “My parents died too!”, the Cambodian lawyer said. In an escalation of flaming remarks and reproachful finger-pointing, both protagonists eventually had to be stopped by security forces to prevent the incident from going out of control... The arguments of the co-Prosecutors When the time came for co-Prosecutors to speak up, William Smith immediately insisted on precising that the Prosecution did not wish to hold the trial in the media but strictly in the courtroom”. He then made it clear that members of the Prosecution had not been involved in any threatening towards the Defence team with such a view to change lawyers, and urged witnesses who attended the hearing to come forward. Judging that the appeal lodged by the Defence team only aimed at slowing down the trial, the co-Prosecutors then considered during the hearing that the Defence team was “competent” to take part in the proceedings and reminded them of their duty to collaborate with the tribunal. In addition, William Smith corrected Jacques Vergès' words by indicating that Khieu Samphan's case file only gathered about 3,000 documents, and not 60,000 as he stated... As for selecting those which needed to be imperatively translated, he advised the Defence team to rely on the index of documents related to the case file, available in the three official languages used by the tribunal, i.e. Khmer, French and English. He also reminded that the Defence team had “intentionally refused the possible services of a full-time translator”. Victims say they are losing faith in the tribunal The ten victims, most of whom have requested the status of civil parties, sported an “I am a Civil Party” tee-shirt and were at last able to sit down and talk. “Please, do not play with the souls of a million and seven hundred thousand dead!”, the first participant said, imploring. “What we just saw is worthy of a circus, it is nonsensical!” Orphaned under the Khmer Rouge regime, deprived of any education and future and living today in poverty, the man threatened, shaking, to call for members of Al-Qaeda, an Islamic terrorist group, to come and “do the job” if the tribunal failed to do him justice. Several victims then expressed their indignation and anger concerning the “unacceptable” attitude of Sa Sovan and prompted the tribunal to dismiss him. One of them estimated that more Khmer Rouge cadres must be charged, since he did not believe that only five people could take the responsibility of the crimes committed during the Democratic Kampuchea era. Speaking with one voice, they explained that their trust in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) was fading away due to recurring delays, allegations of corruption, the lack of available resources but also of information about the progress of the ECCC. They therefore exhorted the tribunal to quicken the proceedings on account of the ageing of the accused but also of victims. The Pre-Trial Chamber will render its decision at a later date, not stated at the time of writing. |
Posted by
គីមឡុង=KKL