In Courts, Power Can Trump Law
Villagers have increasingly relied on mass gatherings to influence the outcomes of court cases. (15 December 2008)
Inrecent years, battles in Cambodia’s courts have often been fought between aunified poor against money, the powerful or an unjust judge. Rightsgroups have observed that when a large group attempts to defend itsrepresentatives, courts will postpone questioning or public hearings, areflection of a trend for courts to side not with truth or law but with poweror unified force. Many ofthese cases involve land disputes, where the poor are often victims, said ThunSaray, director of the rights group Adhoc. “If theywant justice, they have to have a balance of power, or as much money as theother side,” he said. “The poor, who don’t have the balance of money or power,they will lose for sure. They can do nothing but unite to fight injustice.” Rightsgroups continue to appeal to the government for reform of the judiciary, notingthat injustice leads to social instability. ThunSaray said he has noticed that when hundreds of people go to the courts to backtheir representatives, they are banned from joining proceedings, or proceedingsare postponed. Earlylast week, Licadho rights worker Chheng Sophors said, more than 300 villagersin Kratie province’s Snuol district gathered to support four men they fearedwould be arrested and taken in for questioning. The courts held off from anyarrests, but Chheng Sophors said he still worried they will be taken in secret. “If weall didn’t go with them, we were worried [the courts] would have arrested thefour men,” said Lech Kreunh, a Stieng minority from Snuol district’s Kuychirungvillage. Thishappens often. When many supporters follow potential suspects, “usually thecourts don’t dare to proceed,” said Peng Bonnar, Adhoc coordinator forRatanakkiri province. Theinstinct to gather together to protect each other lies in traditions of thedefense of common interest in collective communities, he added. KemSophorn, a judge and inspector at the Ministry of Justice, said such behaviorundermined Cambodia’s rule of law, where a Supreme Council of Magistracy, theking and the government work to ensure justice for citizens. “Ourjudicial system is getting better,” he said. “The Ministry of Justice hasinvestigated all cases in which complaints were filed. People who take the lawinto their our hands are wrong.” Whencourts call someone in for questioning, they are not necessarily arrestingthem, he said. “By law, we don’t need to call them. We could just issue awarrant and have them arrested by police, while other villagers wouldn’t know.” Rightsgroups should not encourage people to dishonor the law or mobilize them to takethe law into their own hands, he said. Critics should identify specific judgesor cases, but general criticism won’t solve the problem. Suchadvice is little consolation for people like Sren Kert, 48, who fled to PhnomPenh last week, worried he would be arrested when he was called in forquestioning at a court. “Theywanted to arrest me because I stood out in a protest,” he said. “They didn’ttake into consideration the fact that land belongs to all villagers whoprotested.” Herepeated a few sayings that circulate about a court system that is viewed ascorrupt and unfair: “My Lord Court: no money, no solution” “It istrue,” he said. Peopledon’t trust the courts, which is why they amass in large groups, said Licadhofounder Kek Galabru. “Threeor four hundred of them will come to tell the court that they support thesuspects who are being tried,” she said. “They have done nothing wrong by showingtheir support, and it is within their rights.” KekGalabru denied the charges that rights agencies encouraged villagers to takethe law into their own hands. “Organizationsonly give them consultation about the law, explaining to them legal procedures,”Adhoc’s Thun Saray said. “It has been their own idea to unite.” SuonVisal, secretary-general of the Cambodian Bar Association, said properlydefending some cases can be difficult, meanwhile, because alleged victims orsuspects are often ill-prepared. Villagers may not have the legal understandingtheir opponents do, making it difficult to win at a case that requires deepinvestigation. “Oftenthey don’t prepare themselves to fight for justice,” he said. “For example, thecourt asks for some legal requirements, and they don’t do it. When it comes tothe hearing, they don’t have evidence; they lose. They only rely on the truth,so it causes a lot of difficulty for the lawyer.”