Home » Posts tagged 'Cambodia'
Tag Archives: Cambodia
This video is a special episode of “Facing Justice”, a weekly television series about Case 002 produced by the WCSC in collaboration with the East-West Center. It presents a recap of Case 002 from its inception in November 2011 through May 2012.
Hearing on Evidence on Week 18
Week Ending May 23 2012
The importance of the right of the accused to be present in his trial was highlighted this week in the face of Ieng Sary’s deteriorating health. Ieng Sary was rushed to the hospital on Thursday, 17 May 2012, after experiencing severe coughing, difficulty in breathing, and dizziness. When trial resumed on Monday, 21 May 2012, the Accused was still in the hospital and the medical report submitted by his doctor was read in court. Ieng Sary’s international counsel, Mr. Michael Karnavas, asked for a suspension of the proceedings without opposition from any of the other Parties. The Trial Chamber granted the request and rescheduled the hearing to Wednesday, 23 May 2012, a day after Ieng Sary’s release from the hospital.
Hearing on Evidence Week 17
Week Ending 17 May 2012
After more than a week’s break, the Trial Chamber continued to hear the testimony of Witness Mr. Pean Khean on 17 May 2012. International Co-Prosecutor, Mr. Tarik Abdulhak, wrapped-up the OCP’s examination and was followed by CPLCL, Ms. Elisabeth Simmoneau-Fort and Mr. Pich Ang. Thereafter, the Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary, and Khieu Samphan Defense Teams examined the Witness. Today’s proceedings marked the conclusion of the Witness’ three-day examination.
This video is a special episode of “Facing Justice”, a weekly television series about Case 002 produced by the WCSC in collaboration with the East-West Center. It features interviews with civil parties, organizations of Khmer Rouge victims allowed to participate in the trial.
Hearing on Evidence Week 16
Week Ending May 3, 2012
This week, it was the Defense Teams’ turn to question Mr. Saloth Ban, Pol Pot’s nephew, who served as Secretary General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) during the DK Regime. Saloth Ban was quite responsive to the Defense Counsels’ questions, all the while maintaining that Pol Pot was merely one of the “needles in the ocean,” which meant that Pol Pot did not make decisions on his own. Saloth Ban also explained about the concept “democratic centralism,” and gave insight into the Communist Party of Indochina and Angkar. He provided information on the roles of two senior Khmer Rouge officials, Chhim Sam Aok alias “Comrade Pang,” and a certain Cheam who worked at the MFA. Upon the conclusion of Saloth Ban’s testimony, another insider witness and former aide of Koy Thuon, Mr. Pean Khean, was called to the stand. The OCP, led by Mr. Tarik Abdulhak and Mr. Vincent de Wilde d’Estmael, examined the Witness on the administrative and communication structures of his security unit and the roles of the three Accused. Pean Khean, a member of the ethnic minority known as “Kavet,” described his experience as a security guard, messenger and food procurer in the CPK. The Witness recounted what he knew of the roles and functions of K-1 and K-3. His proximity to the Khmer Rouge’s Minister of Commerce Koy Thuon alias “Thuch” and high-level cadre Pang allowed him to shed some light on the regime’s structure.
Hearing on Evidence Week 15
Week Ending April 26, 2012
This week, the Trial Chamber heard the testimony of Mr. Saloth Ban, former Secretary General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) of Democratic Kampuchea. The OCP, Civil Party Lawyers, the Chamber, and the Ieng Sary Defense questioned the Witness Saloth Ban was asked questions regarding his background, his relationship with Pol Pot, his familiarity with other Khmer Rouge leaders, and how decisions were made in the Communist Party of Kampuchea. The questions particularly focused on the roles and responsibilities of Accused Ieng Sary concerning the arrest and detention of returning Cambodian intellectuals and MFA personnel. The Witness also testified regarding the administration, communication, and decision-making structures of MFA. He gave testimony regarding Office 870, Boeung Trabek, and Chraing Chamres, an alleged Animal Husbandry and Food Production Office.
Hearing on Evidence Week 14
Week Ending April 20, 2012
After a short break for the Khmer New Year, trial resumed on 18 April with Nuon Chea momentarily breaking his silence to read a statement in response to the testimony of Kaing Guek Eav alias “Duch.” In Nuon Chea’s statement, he accused Duch of lying, and categorically denied that he was the latter’s superior during the DK regime. At the end of his statement, he expressed that he would not answer questions. Despite objections from the OCP and the CPLCL, who demanded that Nuon Chea answer their queries, the Trial Chamber acknowledged the primacy of the right of the Accused to remain silent as prescribed under Article 35 new (g) of the ECCC Law. However, the Trial Chamber ruled that it may take Nuon Chea’s selective exercise of this right into consideration when determining the evidentiary weight of his testimony.
Hearing on Evidence — Week 13
Week Ending 10 April, 2012
This week, the Ieng Sary and Khieu Samphan Defense Teams examined witness Kaing Guek Eav, alias “Duch.” In a highly-charged inquiry that was fraught with numerous objections and non-responsive answers, Ieng Sary’s international counsel, Mr. Michael Karnavas, questioned Duch on his previous statements. Karnavas sought to prove that the Witness was merely a mid-level cadre who did not personally know how the leaders of Democratic Kampuchea made decisions. Karnavas submitted that Duch gained his knowledge about the regime, not contemporaneously but from his personal research for Case 001. Counsel further averred that Duch never had any interactions with Ieng Sary or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). Khieu Samphan’s international counsel, Mr. Arthur Vercken, aimed to show that his client had nothing to do with confessions, and that Duch’s statements relating to Khieu Samphan were either hearsay, mere assumptions, or based on information obtained from inadmissible S-21 confessions. He also pointed out inconsistencies in Duch’s statements. As Vercken finished his examination earlier than anticipated, the Chamber allowed Nuon Chea’s national counsel, Mr. Son Arun, to ask questions and conclude his own examination of the Witness. Upon the conclusion of Duch’s testimony, the Chamber announced a short recess for the Khmer New Year, with proceedings to resume on 18 April 2012.
Hearing on Evidence Week 11 – Examination of Kaing Guek Eav
Week Ending March 29, 2012
This week, the Co-Prosecutors proceeded with the examination of Kaing Guek Eav, alias “Duch,” on the administrative and communication structures of the CPK and the DK regime, as well as the roles of the three Accused. Duch was the chairperson of S-21, a security center where over 12,200 persons were imprisoned, tortured and executed. He was the first to have been charged before the ECCC, and was found guilty of crimes against humanity and war crimes. On appeal, the Supreme Court Chamber sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Hearing on Evidence Week 10 – Reception of Testimonial Evidence
Week Ending March 22, 2012
This week marked the beginning of reception of testimonial evidence on the administrative structure (central and national) and the communication structure in the DK regime, as well as the roles of the Accused. The OCP, through national counsel, Mr. Seng Bunkheang, and international counsel, Mr. William Smith, examined Kaing Guek Eav alias “Duch” on the latter’s membership to the CPK, his roles and duties within the party and his continued affiliation with it after 1979. Duch was the Secretary of the notorious S-21 security center, an interrogation and execution machinery in Democratic Kampuchea. For his acts, he was tried, convicted, and sentenced to life imprisonment for war crimes and crimes against humanity. For Case 002, he has returned to court, not as an accused, but as a witness who is in a unique position to shed light on what took place during this dark time in Cambodia’s history. The OCP questioned Duch on (i) his recruitment and affiliation to the CPK (ii) his work as a party member, (iii) his arrest in 1999; and (iv) CPK ideology; and (v) CPK policies.