Home

Archives

AHRC Site

<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />CAMBODIA: The absence of the rule of law aggravating the human rights situation in the country

Under the international peace agreements concluded in 1991 to end a protracted war in the country as well as under its own constitution, Cambodia has undertaken to ensure the respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms of its people, including the establishment of an independent judiciary for the protection of those rights and freedoms. The other State signatories to these agreements also have a share in the human rights obligations towards the Cambodian people.

Ever since the conclusion of the agreements, Cambodia has received continued technical, economic and financial assistance worth altogether some US $ 500 million a year for the promotion of the respect for and observance of human rights, the establishment of institutions of the rule of law including the judicial system, and social and economic rehabilitation and development.

However, some 16 years after the signing of the peace agreements, the situation of human rights in Cambodia still falls far short of what had been planned and expected.

Compared with the communist days prior to 1991, the situation in the country has changed substantially. Cambodian society is now more open. There is freedom of enterprise and a thriving market economy, but capitalism has gone wild and powerful and rich individuals or private companies are grabbing public and people's land, leading to the forced evictions of thousands of families (further details follow below).

Land-grabbing has been one of the most serious issues facing Cambodia, leading to the most widespread violations of economic and social rights since the country abandoned communist collectivization at the end of the 1980s to embrace a market economy based on private property. In recent years, due to accelerated development and town beautification policies coupled with speculative activities for quick profit-making on land, this problem has become worse, as land conflicts have dramatically increased.

An NGO called NGO Forum listed 1,551 cases of land-grabbing between 1991 and 2004, affecting nearly 160,300 families or almost 7 percent of the population. Another NGO called ADHOC alone received 335 cases in 2005 and 450 in 2006 in which it dispensed legal assistance to victims.

 The problem of land-grabbing originates in the rule by decree which is the tenet of governance in Cambodia. This rule has enabled the powerful and the rich, backed by powerful officials, to use their high positions and influence to secure eviction orders and the enforcement of these orders from the state machinery, without going through due process of law and without paying fair and just compensation to evictees. This rule by decree, in the form of the National Authority for the Resolution of Land Disputes, the war against land-grabbers and most recent seminar, are but palliatives and cannot replace the rule of law as a means to eradicate land-grabbing, let alone protect other human rights of the Cambodian people.

The core element of the rule of law is an independent judiciary. In Cambodia, the judiciary is under executive control as judges are mostly affiliated to the ruling CPP party, a former communist party whose discipline is still enforced by the idea that "you cannot get out of the party alive". The Cambodian legal profession, through the Bar Association, has not only condoned but has also contributed to this perilous state of the judiciary, as it has not played its part in improving the administration of justice and, further, as its members have bribed judges to "win" cases for their clients.

 The judiciary can be made an instrument of repression by the government or the rich and powerful when judges are readily willing to imprison government critics or victims of land-grabbing on frequently fabricated charges, including defamation, disinformation, incitement, causing damage to property, or illegal occupation of property. The public has little confidence in the judiciary, and victims of land-grabbing have refrained from resorting to the courts to protect their rights, preferring instead to seek help from NGOs to directly lobby powerful officials, who, ironically cannot do much themselves  against these powerful and rich land-grabbers.