Closure at What Cost?
Given Cambodia's current political climate, with its lack
of respect for human rights and failure to govern by rule
of law, the United States should be applauded for steadfastly
refusing to participate in the upcoming Khmer Rouge trials.
Prosecution of Khmer Rouge leaders in Cambodia will be at
best a demonstration of hypocrisy by current leaders of Cambodia
and at worst an opportunity for the current regime, a vestige
of both the Khmer Rouge itself and communist Vietnam, to rewrite
history.
Not only is the current Prime Minister of Cambodia, Hun
Sen, a former Khmer Rouge commander, but his politburo has
been a model of authoritarian behavior since it was first
put in place by communist Vietnam in 1979. Hun Sen's over
25-year grip on power (surpassed only by Fidel Castro and
Robert Mugabe) is carefully maintained through violence and
intimidation. Over the past year, for instance, he has brazenly
imprisoned those who speak out in opposition to his policies
on trumped-up charges of defamation. And as evidence of Hun
Sen's control over the judiciary, several of those charged
with defamation were released in response to a visit by a
United States diplomat to Cambodia in 2006. A Cambodian government
spokesperson stated that Hun Sen had sent a letter to the
court "ordering" the release of those being detained
and that the releases were a "gift" to the visiting
American diplomat.
In this backdrop of corrupt, authoritarian rule, true justice
will be difficult to mete out. The UN's insistence on pursuing
a trial of the Khmer Rouge at any cost has made it infinitely
more difficult. By conceding to Hun Sen's demand that a majority
of the tribunal judges be Cambodian, the UN has essentially
given him control over the proceedings. Not only is the experience
and competence of Cambodian judges in doubt, but even more
importantly their impartiality and independence from political
influence. Citing these concerns, the UN's own expert jurists
vehemently recommended that most, if not all, judges be non-Cambodian.
In all fairness to the UN, Hun Sen has never really shown
any true resolve to seek justice for victims of the Khmer
Rouge. Since an agreement was reached with the UN in June
2003 for joint cooperation to set up the Khmer Rouge tribunal,
Hun Sen has contrived various delay tactics to forestall the
trials. On one occasion, he even claimed that Cambodia could
not afford $11.8 million of its share of the tribunal budget,
even though UN member states had already pledged $43 million
of the estimated $56.3 million budget. Many of the accused
are octogenarians and in poor health and his hope may be that
they will simply pass away if he stalls long enough. In the
event that he runs out of excuses to delay or prevent the
trials, however, Hun Sen is virtually guaranteed control over
all facets of the proceedings, having packed the courts with
men loyal to him.
Closure for Khmer Rouge victims is often cited as one of
the primary reasons for pushing forward what even most proponents
readily admit is a flawed tribunal structure. But is prosecution
of past tyrants worth the precedent it sets for Cambodians
concerning the absolute power of their current tyrant? The
United States has correctly answered in the negative and holds
fast to her principle that the future of Cambodia's democracy
should not be sold out for a mere show trial. Rather than
teaching Cambodians respect for the rule of law and human
rights, such a trial will instead reinforce the resignation
of Cambodians to living under rule of dictatorship. A show
trial of the Khmer Rouge orchestrated by Hun Sen will not
only do disservice to victims of the Khmer Rouge, but also
to the current and future victims of Hun Sen's authoritarian
regime.
|