Cambodia makes its own way in Kem Sokha case

Opinion, Asia Times, 7 March 2023 (Link)

 

The sentencing of an opposition figure for treason sends a message that foreign interference will be rejected.       

Cambodia made two important choices on its national trajectory considering the recent sentencing of Kem Sokha to 27 years of house arrest on charges of treason and conspiracy with a foreign power.

First, it made clear that Cambodia chose peaceful democratization in its consistent endeavor to build a multiparty liberal democracy as enshrined in its constitution.

Some may observe the sentence as the end of democracy. But looking at Cambodia’s history of nation-building, the event was just a point of time in which Cambodia confirmed its self-determination on what kind of democracy it intends to build.

Surely, Cambodia does not opt for agitating, abrupt, violent and selfish democracy in which individual freedom is cherished and sanctified more than peace, stability, and social harmony.

The context is strange when the individual right to possess a gun is so much more important than the protection of children’s lives. The context is beyond comprehensible when individual freedom and democracy is being prioritized so much more than peace even at the sacrifice of the people’s right to life.

What does democracy mean for countries fallen into wars that see no end? The right to life is the most sacred human right of all.

Attempted coups, sabotage of government and public security are responded to firmly in every country. For instance, in December 2022, Germany suppressed a coup plot by launching one of its biggest ever raids, nationwide and beyond (in Austria and Italy), involving 3,000 officers, searching 150 properties and arresting 25 people in total.

In July 2016, scores of people were killed in Turkey and more than 1,400 wounded as a result of an attempted coup. Meanwhile, the government arrested some 6,000 people, including high-ranking soldiers and judges.

Compared with the above cases, Cambodian authorities’ actions in containing a planned color revolution have been rather calm. No violence, no torture, no bloodshed.

All human-rights aspects have been observed strictly. For instance, the rights of criminal defendants were fully guaranteed, including the right to a lawyer, permission for observation of the trials, and health-care consideration. In Cambodia, foreign diplomats were even allowed to observe the 66 hearings held from January 15, 2020, until December 21, 2022.

In contrast, in April 2019, Thailand’s Foreign Ministry protested against Western embassies accusing it of breaching protocol when the latter witnessed court proceedings of a Thai politician charged with sedition.

The crime of treason, conspiracy with foreign powers, sabotage of government and public security are among the most severe types of crimes.

Cambodia firmly implemented its law in protecting constitutional order, and in the process has strictly observed human-rights obligations and protocols.

These actions clearly show that Cambodia has chosen democracy based on the rule of law. All political parties and actors must remind themselves of obligations to protect peace, stability and social harmony in their promotion of multi-party liberal democracy under the constitution.

This is Cambodia’s choice.

The second choice Cambodia made in the Kem Sokha case was to make clear that it strongly rejects foreign intervention and interference in domestic affairs.

In 1994, Singapore sentenced Michael Fay, an American teenager, to jail and caning for vandalism and theft. Then-US president Bill Clinton requested clemency, putting Singapore in a dilemma.

Recalling how the event strained US-Singapore relations, former prime minister Goh Chok Tong noted, “On the one hand, we need to stand firm on the rule of law..… On the other hand, had we granted clemency, we would not have done our relationship with the US a favor, because we would be seen to be a client state of the US.”

The late prime minister Lee Kuan Yew put it more bluntly: “The American society is the richest and most prosperous in the world, but it is hardly safe and peaceful. If you like it that way, that is your problem. But that is not the path we choose. They always talk about human rights. I think it is just a convenient slogan.”

According to Goh, in 2002 Clinton said to him, “You should have caned him more,” and added that Fay’s father should also have caned him earlier.

This was a tough decision for Singapore when the country needed to reject foreign interference in executing its rule of law.

But Kem Sokha’s case was much tougher. This is not a case where an American kid messed up a Singapore park, but it was a case where a Cambodian politician stirred up domestic politics with support from foreign powers. Kem Sokha said so himself proudly, that his activities were meant to gain more political confidence from his supporters.

No one tortured him to make him confess; and no one forced him to speak about his long-term plots to overthrow the Hun Sen government through a color revolution with support from foreign powers.

This is like having a Russian-American politician trying to run for president in the US, claiming that he has a good formula to fix America’s democracy. How would the Americans handle a foreign-controlled politician in their homeland?

Rejecting foreign interference is no easy feat for small states. Threats, coercion, intimidation and unilateral sanctions are foreseeable consequences.

But Cambodia still says no to foreign interference in its domestic affairs, and has chosen to implement its laws firmly.

If foreign sanction results from maintaining domestic peace, and the foreign trophy of human rights is given only at the expense of domestic peace and stability, Cambodia would choose domestic peace and sovereignty.

Senior Cambodian leaders are rather tone-deaf about sanctions from Western nations because they experienced unjust economic sanctions for 12 years, from 1979 until 1993, after survivors emerged from the genocidal Pol Pot regime. They are resilient and proud people who have contributed to turning the country from war to peace, and from peace to prosperity.

They are the generation who believed that foreign intervention had been one of the major causes of Cambodia’s tragedy that had left scars that can be seen even until today, like landmines and unexploded remnants of wars (UXO) as well as the toxic Agent Orange legacy.

Their experiences tell them not to let go of peace, independence and sovereignty. Cambodia will hold on tight of its own destiny with its own hands.

Cambodia chose a peaceful democratization process based on the rule of law and with full respect to peace and stability. Its self-determination shall be respected.