Paragraph 1

While Cambodian people have been able to express their right to self-determination in the general elections of 1993 and 1998, ADHOC and LICADHO are concerned about the lack of influence of the people on the political process. The one opposition party in the National Assembly has not received any formal answers to questions it regularly poses to the government since the 1998 elections. When an NGO criticized the government’s attitude, it was severely criticized by the Ministry of Information and told not to interfere in state affairs. 

Furthermore, ADHOC and LICADHO are concerned about the increase in illegal logging and selling of Cambodia's natural resources by the State and powerful individuals. Apart from the environmental consequences for the country, the proceeds of these transactions are not integrated into the National Budget. The granting of semi-autonomous zones in the country to former leaders of the Khmer Rouge regime (e.g. Pailin) only increases the possibility for illegal selling of Cambodia's resources. 

Paragraph 1

The right to establish political parties: between 1995 and 1998, the Khmer Nation Party (later Sam Rainsy Party - SRP) was prevented from registering as a political party, on the grounds that no legislation existed regulating the creation of political formations. The Kannapat Kaun Khmer complained that there was no official announcement of the deadline for the registration of political parties for the 1998 elections. This has prevented the participation of at least this party. 

Paragraph 2

The government report cites a number of laws which relate to civil and political rights. ADHOC and LICADHO believe that several of these laws contain provisions contrary to the provisions of the Covenant. These include the Law on the Co-Statute for Civil>In the semi-autonomous zones controlled by the former Khmer Rouge, there are two illegal prisons in use. Treatment of detainees is not monitored, though suspected to be inhuman. Human rights workers have inspected the facilities in Phnom Malai, and observed cage-like structures exposed to the elements and shackles and have noted the numerous disturbing reports of summary executions of suspects.

Military bases throughout the country regularly detain civilians and military personnel. 

In June 1998 in Battambang province a soldier suspected of stealing a necklace from another soldier was detained for over two months in an empty fuel tank.  

In 1997, a group of teenagers accused of creating public disturbance were detained for over one week in a shipping container in Siem Reap military base. The container was exposed to direct sunlight causing the victims to suffer from severe dehydration. 

The Dangkor detention center is a center for homeless under the jurisdiction of Phnom Penh municipality and the Ministry of Social Action. The center illegally detained persons arrested by municipal police in an attempt to empty the capital of the homeless. Treatment reported by those detained included deprivation of food and water, no access to toilets, beatings, extortion and deprivation of exercise. After the intervention of human rights workers, the center was closed down several times, but re-opened shortly afterwards. 

Paragraph 2

In only six prisons of the 24 legal detention centers in Cambodia are unconvicted and convicted prisoners segregated. Unconvicted and convicted prisoners generally receive the same treatment. In some cases, unconvicted prisoners are subject to further limitation of rights, shorter visits, censorship of mail and even shackling, in fear that they may either attempt to escape or interfere in the investigation of their case. 

In most prisons, it is still the practice to hold juveniles and adult prisoners in the same cells, with the notable exceptions of five recently refurbished prisons and the Youth Rehabilitation Center. Over 70% of juvenile offenders are kept in the same facilities as adult offenders regardless of the nature of their alleged offense. 

Paragraph 3

The aim of the correctional system in Cambodia according to law is social rehabilitation. In reality it is more accurate to say that Cambodian prisons are places of punishment and do not promote rehabilitation. The current prison conditions are not only inhuman as a form of detention, they are also dysfunctional from a rehabilitating point of view. Poor post-release options for most prisoners certainly increase the probability that they will become repeat offenders. Interviews in six prisons showed that a vast majority of all prisoners had no formal education at all or only five years of primary education. No more than 10% had finished high school. Many said that they did not have a place to stay after their release, and even fewer have a job to go back to. Most prisoners interviewed said that they wanted to live in urban areas after release, yet the most common work skill claimed was farming. 

With regard to education, occupation and housing, women have considerably worse future prospects. Fewer women than men claim that they have a place to stay after release and as in society in general, women have lower levels of education. Among 81 women prisoners interviewed in 1997, 90% had only primary level or no education at all. 

In January 1999, a woman in Kandal prison who had been incarcerated in her late teens and had served a ten-year prison sentence refused to leave the prison after completing her sentence as she had no where to go. 

Unfortunately there are few work, training or even exercise programs in the prisons that can improve prisoners’ options after release. The few small programs that exist in prisons are usually managed and financed by NGOs and have not been reproduced on a national level. Instead the fact that most prisoners have nothing useful to do with their time tends to result in depression, alienation and feelings of helplessness. These states intensify the difficulties prisoners have in reintegrating in society after release. 

Juvenile offenders receive the same treatment as adult offenders in prisons where they are incarcerated together. In 1995, the Royal Government created The Youth Rehabilitation Center (YRC) and placed it under the direct jurisdiction of the Ministry of Youth Rehabilitation and the Council of Ministers. The YRC holds between 40 and 60 children aged between 9 and 17. The children incarcerated in the YRC are usually street children, beggars and some suspected of prostitution and petty theft who are arrested during police sweeps as part of the capital’s beautification campaign. At any given moment, less than 10% of those incarcerated have been either charged or convicted of a crime. A disciplinary council meets regularly and reviews individual cases. Since the opening of the YRC, human rights workers have documented at least two serious cases of torture and several cases of denial of medical care. The seclusion of the center as well as the controlled access and lack of transparency fuel suspicions that the educational and vocational training activities observed by visitors are staged mainly for fund-raising purposes. 

A considerable number of prisoners in Cambodia, and to a much higher extent women, have been given additional prison sentences under the Law on Forced Physical Imprisonment because of unpaid fines, damages or compensation. In many cases these debts have remained unpaid simply because the prisoner’s economic situation is such that he/she has no ability to pay.

Article 7 of the Law on Forced Physical Imprisonment stipulates that regardless of the amount of debt, the prison term cannot exceed two years. In case there is more than one complainant the law has been interpreted to allow a maximum of two years of imprisonment for each complaint. 

A woman arrested in Siem Reap and sentenced in 1996 to eight months imprisonment for fraud was given an additional twelve years in prison under the Law on Forced Physical Imprisonment because there were six creditors. 

Paragraph 1

In the evenings and nights there are still checkpoints in many provinces, which are manned by armed people in police or military uniform, who extort money from travelers. The civilian control over the armed forces is still very limited. During the demonstrations in September 1998, roadblocks were installed at the access roads to Phnom Penh and people entering and leaving the city were questioned.  

ADHOC and LICADHO were pleased to see that the recently repatriated refugees from the camps at the Thai-Cambodian border were able to settle in the regions where they originated from, with the assistance of aid agencies. However, especially in the northeastern provinces of Mondulkiri and Ratanakiri, problems are expected to arise in the field of land distribution. 

Paragraph 2

After a grenade attack on the house of Prime Minister Hun Sen on September 7, 1998, which marked the beginning of the violent crackdown of the post-election demonstrations, an international travel ban was imposed on all opposition parliamentarians. None of the 58 elected National Assembly members of FUNCINPEC and the SRP were allowed to leave Cambodia. This travel ban was only lifted after the swearing-in of the National Assembly on September 24, 1998.  

Paragraph 4

ADHOC and LICADHO agree with the RCG that Cambodians are not exiled from their country, but wishes to note that since the violence of July 1997 a large number of Cambodians have sought refuge abroad and have gone into self-exile. 

In 1995, Prince Norodom Sirivudh was convicted in absentia to a ten year prison sentence for intent to kill the second Prime Minister on charges of illegal possession of weapons. However, Prince Sirivudh was allowed to leave the country prior to his conviction. In 1997, he attempted to return to Cambodia, but airline carriers would not allow him on their flights after the second Prime Minister had threatened to shoot the plane transporting Prince Sirivudh out of the sky. 

After the swearing-in of the National Assembly on September 24, 1998, the majority of opposition parliamentarians fled abroad, reporting fears for their safety. They have subsequently returned to Cambodia.  

In October 1998, the Ministry of Information threatened to revoke the visa of an American reporter for his coverage of the events related to the inauguration of the National Assembly. After protests from foreign diplomats, the Ministry backed down. 

On December 5, 1996, 19 persons of Vietnamese origin accused of involvement in the People's Action Party (PAP), a United States based Vietnamese political grouping which advocates democratic reforms in Vietnam, were deported by the Cambodian authorities and handed over to the Vietnamese police. They were immediately arrested and placed in detention in Ho Chi Minh City. The 19 deportees were among a group of 28 Vietnamese who were arrested when they tried to cross the border with Thailand to hold a political meeting of the PAP. Eight of the 28 were able to prove their Cambodian citizenship or their legal residency in Cambodia, one was a United States citizen. Ten among the 19 had registered applications for asylum with the UNHCR. According to human rights organizations, this was not the first time that Vietnamese citizens who had applied for asylum were deported to Vietnam, where they were handed over to the authorities. Seventeen remain in detention without charge or trial in Vietnam. 

Paragraph 1

ADHOC and LICADHO agree with the RCG that there are still many problems regarding the equality of all individuals before the law. One of the main problems contributing to this inequality is the existence of article 51 the 1994 Law on the Co-Statute for Civil Servants, which implies that a civil servant, which includes security forces, cannot be prosecuted unless there is a previous authorization from the Minister involved, or from the Council of Ministers. This article is also often applied to military personnel. It is the experience of human rights workers in Cambodia that authorization to prosecute is rarely given and that in effect military, police and other government personnel are placed above the principle of equality before the law. Furthermore, this provision also gives a suspect the time and the opportunity to avoid arrest by disappearing to another province and thereby escaping justice. 

Corruption, influence of high-ranking officials and political bias often result in judicial decisions in which the rich and powerful are favored over poor individuals. 

A recent example is the ruling in February 1999 by the lower court of Kampot province in a land dispute, whereby the judge ruled in favor of a military commander and ignored all the evidence supporting the claim of the villagers who lived in the disputed area. No thorough investigation was ordered by the judge into the substantiated evidence presented by the villagers, that the military commander based his claim on forged documents. 

Under Article 109 of the Constitution, the judiciary is recognized as an independent power. All judges are under the supervision of the Supreme Council of Magistracy (SCM). Only the SCM is allowed to take disciplinary action against delinquent judges. However, the SCM is not fully independent of the Ministry of Justice, since the Minister of Justice and the Prosecutors-General of the Appeals Court and the Supreme Court are members. Furthermore, the SCM is heavily CPP dominated. 

Influence of the Ministry of Justice on the judiciary is often exercised through circulars issued by the ministry, which have the effect of law. This violates the principle that only the legislative branch has the power to make laws. Furthermore, the Ministry of Justice has used its power to influence the decisions made by the courts, especially in politically sensitive cases. In 1998, the Ministry of Justice suspended three judges of the Appeal Court after they overturned a sentence in a politically sensitive case. 

Many judges are still openly aligned with political parties and are appointed through the involvement of political parties. The method of appointing judges enhances the link between branches and makes them susceptible to political pressure. The independence of the judiciary therefore is still very limited and a reason for concern. There are many cases of interference by the executive and local authorities in judicial matters. 

In January 1998, the First Deputy Governor of Kandal Province summoned the court staff and organized them as a branch of the CPP. The court was also instructed to delay the hearing and resolution of any cases filed by persons in opposition with the government or which involved complaints against the government until the elections were over. 

Many of the judges and lawyers in Cambodia were trained shortly after the Democratic Kampuchea period, which provided them with a very poor legal education. Most of them were originally recruited from schools where they were teachers. Many of them still lack basic knowledge related to justice in a constitutional democracy and human rights. The competence of the judiciary needs to be enhanced and ensured. 

The lack of material resources contributes to probability that individuals in the judicial process will ignore the rule of law. Many court cases are influenced by bribes and corruption, which is partly due to the low salaries of judges and other court staff. All courts lack adequate operating funds. In 1998, salaries for judges were only increased for the judges in the Supreme Court. The problem of corruption is said to be worse in the provincial courts, however. 

Another, related problem is the lack of staff in the courts. There is a severe shortage of judges, prosecutors and court clerks. This leads to long waiting periods for cases to be heard and the acceptance of poorly qualified candidates. 

Paragraph 2

In practice, the presumption of innocence is not observed in the Cambodian legal system. The high number of torture and physical ill-treatment cases during police questioning, aimed at obtaining a confession, is a clear example of this. So far, the proposed measures in the government report have not had the desired result or have not been implemented at all. 

Paragraph 3

There are still many shortcomings regarding the minimal guarantees for those charged with criminal offenses, though practices vary considerably from one court to another. Pre-trial detainees and their lawyers regularly complain of lack of clear charges, not being informed when charges are modified, non-disclosure of evidence, and denial of access to witnesses. Judges are also accused of routinely ignoring motions filed by lawyers. Improvements have been noted in the access of pre-trial detainees to lawyers. Among prisoners in six provinces sentenced during 1997, as many as 97% claim that they had legal representation during their trial. The progress noted in the last years is attributable to the establishment of two NGOs that provide legal aid to the poor. However, access to lawyers remains difficult in the remote provinces, as the NGOs have not extended their programs to those areas. Violations of the rights stipulated in the ICCPR also frequently occur in politically sensitive or motivated cases. 

The UNTAC Criminal Code says that the duration of pre-trial detention should not exceed four months, but this period may be extended to six months if justified by the requirements of the investigation. In reality little respect is paid to the four months time limit. In six prisons in 1997, more than half of those sentenced during that year waited more than four months in detention before being brought to trial. As noted previously, practices vary from one court to another. In 1998 in Phnom Penh, over 40% of prisoners remained over six months in pre-trial detention. 

In 1998 in Phnom Penh, Sam Chit was arrested and charged with complicity in a murder. He was kept in pre-trial detention for 21 months before his case was heard in court. He was acquitted, as there was no evidence. 

Paragraph 4

With reference to the procedures regarding juveniles we refer to the information given under article 10 of the report on the Youth Rehabilitation Center. In the UNTAC Criminal Code it is stated that minors 13 to 18 years old may not be placed in pre-trial detention for more than one month. The length of detention might, however, be doubled if the minor is charged with a crime. These stipulations are not well respected; 70% of minors sentenced in 1998 spent more than the maximum time prescribed by law in pre-trial detention.