Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Judges dismiss call to probe new KRouge case


PHNOM PENH (AFP) – Cambodia’s UN-backed war crimes
tribunal on Tuesday rejected demands to pursue a politically-sensitive
new Khmer Rouge case that has divided the court.
The investigating judges said the prosecution failed to follow procedure
when filing a request for unnamed suspects to be interviewed for their
alleged crimes as members of the brutal 1975-79 regime to be prosecuted.
In a written statement, the judges said international co-prosecutor
Andrew Cayley’s request was invalid because he hadn’t done the necessary
paperwork to file the requests without the backing of his national
counterpart.
Cayley and his Cambodian colleague Chea Leang are openly at odds over
how to proceed with the case, with Leang saying the suspects, thought to
be two ex-Khmer Rouge commanders, are outside the court’s jurisdiction.
Cayley can appeal the judges’ decision not to pursue an investigation
but the announcement appears to signal their willingness to close the
tribunal’s controversial third case, prompting fears the court is caving
to government pressure.
“The judges are using questionable legal technicalities to try to avoid
the very important substantive issues raised by Cayley,” said Anne
Heindel, a legal adviser at the Documentation Centre of Cambodia, which
researches Khmer Rouge atrocities.
“It’s the continuation of their attempts to kill case three.”
In its landmark first trial, the tribunal sentenced former prison chief
Kaing Guek Eav, better known as Duch, to 30 years in jail in July for
overseeing the deaths of 15,000 people.
That case is now under appeal, while a second trial involving four of
the regime’s most senior surviving leaders is due to start later this
month.
A survivor of the Khmer Rouge regime Hem
Sakou, 79, stands in front of portraits of victims at the Tuol Sleng
(S-21) genocide museum in Phnom Penh May

31, 2011. She was part of the more than 300 villagers brought to the
Khmer Rouge notorious security prison S-21, now museum, by the court on a
regular tour basis. Sakou said that she found the photos of her son who
was killed at S-21, appealing to the U.N. backed tribunal to sentence
the former regime leaders in detention to life in prison for crimes they
committed.
The court is still investigating a fourth case against three more
suspects, believed to be mid-level cadres. But it too is shrouded in
secrecy and faces stiff government opposition.
Prime Minister Hun Sen has repeatedly voiced his objection to further
trials, saying they could plunge the country into civil war, and
observers widely expect the third and fourth cases to be dropped.
Led by “Brother Number One” Pol Pot, who died in 1998, the Marxist Khmer
Rouge regime emptied cities in the late 1970s in a bid to create an
agrarian utopia, executing and killing through starvation and overwork
up to two million.

Survey Finds Increased Confidence in Tribunal

An increasing number of Cambodians in an ongoing survey say they have
more faith in the UN-backed Khmer Rouge tribunal, according to new data
released Thursday.
According to the authors of a survey by the Human Rights Center of
the University of California Berkeley, respondents showed a “positive
trend” in their belief in the tribunal.
The UN-backed tribunal, which is heading toward its second trial, of
four Khmer Rouge leaders, was designed in part to bring national healing
to the trauma of the regime.
But the court has come under increased criticism of political interference and a lack of funding.
However, the Human Rights Center survey, conducted in December 2010
across 125 communes nationwide, found that an increasing number of
Cambodians have confidence in the court.
The authors noted that in 2008, in its first survey, only about 2
percent of respondents said they believed the court would provide any
justice to Khmer Rouge leaders. After the court’s first successful
trial, of torture chief Duch, that number rose to 37 percent.
About 25 percent said the process will help relieve the pain and suffering of victims, compared to 9 percent who disagreed.
“Trust seems to be increasing,” although with some caveats, said
Patrick Vinck, a researcher for the Human Rights Center, said Wednesday.
“It’s still, kind of, ‘Well, I trust them, but I do think they take
bribes,’” he added, summarizing the findings of the survey. “But the
trend is a positive trend.”

Outgoing consultant blasts tribunal judges

A consultant to the investigating judges at the Khmer Rouge tribunal
spoke of the “toxic atmosphere” within the “professionally
dysfunctional” office in resigning in protest last month over the
handling of the court’s controversial third case. The news
follows a public statement issued by the investigating judges on Sunday
acknowledging that multiple staffers from their office had left amid
disagreements over the Case 003 investigation, which was closed in April
and appears to have been scuttled amid opposition from the Cambodian
government. In a resignation letter dated May 5 and addressed to German
co-investigating judge Siegfried Blunk, Stephen Heder, a noted historian
of the Khmer Rouge period, said he and others in the office had become
increasingly disillusioned with the judges’ action in the case.
“In
view of the judges’ decision to close the investigation into Case File
003 effectively without investigating it, which I, like others, believe
was unreasonable; in view of the UN staff’s evidently growing lack of
confidence in your leadership, which I share; and in view of the toxic
atmosphere of mutual mistrust generated by your management of what is
now a professionally dysfunctional office, I have concluded that no good
use can or will be made of my consultancy services,” Heder wrote. He
declined to comment yesterday beyond the resignation letter.
In
response to the resignations of Heder and at least three foreign staff
members from the office, Blunk and his Cambodian counterpart, You
Bunleng, said on Sunday that they “welcome the departure of all staff
members who ignore the sole responsibility of the [co-investigating
judges]” over Case 003.
The suspects in this case remain
officially confidential, though court documents reveal them as former KR
navy commander Meas Mut and air force commander Sou Met, men thought to
be responsible for thousands of deaths.
Blunk and You Bunleng
have evinced a siege mentality in their public statements in recent
weeks, lashing out at those who have questioned their professional
behaviour.
Last month, the judges ordered international
co-prosecutor Andrew Cayley to retract a statement he had made outlining
further investigative steps he planned to request in Case 003, as he is
permitted to do under court rules.
The judges accused Cayley of
breaching the court’s confidentiality rules in an order that Cayley has
appealed. They have since rejected his investigative requests.
Yesterday,
the tribunal’s Pre-Trial Chamber ruled in a unanimous decision that
this retraction order, which Blunk and You Bunleng had stipulated be
carried out within three days, be suspended pending a final decision on
Cayley’s appeal.
In their decision, the Pre-Trial Chamber judges
noted that “the information the Co-Investigating Judges ask the
International Co-Prosecutor to retract is quoted in the Order issued by
the Co-Investigating Judges”.
“As such, the information will
remain in the public domain even if it is ‘retracted’ by the
Co-Prosecutors,” the Pre-Trial Chamber said.
The Pre-Trial
Chamber judges have historically split in ruling on matters related to
cases 003 and 004, with the Cambodian judges opposing the cases and the
international judges in favour. Clair Duffy, a trial monitor with the
Open Society Justice Initiative, said “reason has prevailed” with
yesterday’s decision, though she cautioned that it was still too early
to say whether the chamber will reverse Blunk and You Bunleng’s
rejection of the requests for additional investigation in Case 003.

As Killing Fields Photographer Dies, War Trial Set to Begin

Cambodia 1974, Dith Pran. Dith Pran/NYTimes.com
Cambodia, 1974, photo by Dith Pran. Dith Pran/New York Times.
If you haven’t see the film “The Killing Fields” since it came out in the eighties, perhaps now would be an appropriate time. Dith Pran, the photojournalist and war prisoner who’s story is told by the film has passed away March 31st from cancer just as the Cambodian War Crime Tribunal gears up for a heart wrenching search for truth and justice. 5 top war criminals are being tried in the Khmer Rouge “Year Zero” genocide were an estimated 1.7 million people were killed.
After watching the DVD with bonus material I learned about the rather ironic death of Haing S. Ngor, the actor who played Dith Pran in “The Killing Fields”. Haing S. Ngor, who was a prisoner of war himself and found it difficult to reenact some of the scenes, eventually made a new life for himself in the US but in 1996 was shot to death in an attempted robbery. He escaped the grasp of the Khamer Rouge only to die in a country who still believes that we should be allowed to bear arms.

Sydney H. Schanberg, his partner is still alive.
New York Times article has many more photos of and by Dith Pran and a very recent interview at his bedside. “Dith Pran, Photojournalist and Survivor of the Killing Fields, Dies at 65″ by Douglas Martin, March 21, 2008
Dith Pran NYTimes article.
- – - – - – - -
Upsetting fact of living in the U.S.A.: If you attend a college in Utah you can now carry a concealed weapon, with the proper license of course. In 2006 Utah Supreme court allowed guns on college campuses. The opinion is guns in the hands of law abiding citizens can save lives. The CNN report 
Right to Bear Arms on Campus

Ban Ki-Moon hits back at tribunal criticism

The office of United Nations secretary general Ban Ki-moon has defended
the embattled investigating judges at the Khmer Rouge tribunal in a
statement that drew criticism from local observers and lawyers at the
court.
The judges have come under fire in recent weeks from
victims, civil society groups and even their own staff for their
apparent failure to investigate the tribunal’s third case properly. The
likely dismissal of the case reflects the viewpoint of the Cambodian
government, which opposes prosecutions beyond the upcoming Case 002,
leading many to charge that Case 003 has been sabotaged for political
expediency.
In a statement released in New York on Tuesday, Ban’s
office rejected “media speculation” that the UN had directed the judges
to shutter Case 003 and denied that any political interference had
occurred in the case. A “closing order” – indictments or dismissals in
the case – will be available to public scrutiny at a later date, the
statement added.
“The judges and prosecutors at the Extraordinary
Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) must be allowed to function
free from external interference by the Royal Government of Cambodia, the
United Nations, donor States and civil society,” the statement read,
adding: “Speculating on the content of the Closing Order at this stage
does not assist the independent judicial process.”
However, local
observers said the statement was in fact cause for greater concern
about the tribunal, as the UN refused to acknowledge the abundance of
evidence that the Case 003 investigation has been mismanaged.
Co-investigating
judges Siegfried Blunk of Germany and You Bunleng of Cambodia announced
the conclusion of their Case 003 investigation in April, though without
taking a number of seemingly basic steps including the questioning of
the suspects involved and the examination of a number of alleged crime
sites.
Staff from the judges’ office have since begun resigning
in protest; in a resignation letter to Blunk last month, noted Khmer
Rouge-era historian Stephen Heder, formerly a consultant to the
investigating judges, spoke of the “toxic atmosphere” within their
office, saying it had become “professionally dysfunctional”. He added
that the judges had closed Case 003 “effectively without investigating
it”.
The judges last week rejected a series of requests from
international co-prosecutor Andrew Cayley calling for them to
investigate the case further, a decision Cayley has appealed.
In
the statement Tuesday, Ban’s office cited the confidentiality of the
investigation and said the investigating judges “are not under an
obligation to provide reasons for their actions at this stage of the
investigation in Case 003”.
But Anne Heindel, a legal adviser at
the Documentation Centre of Cambodia, called this an erroneous reading
of court rules and said the UN was “hiding behind a cloak of
confidentiality”.
“As an institution, the UN is trying to protect
the integrity of the court by denying that there are any problems, and
it’s too late for that,” she said. “They need to acknowledge that action
needs to be taken to save this investigation or it could undermine the
entire work of the court.”
Clair Duffy, a trial monitor with the
Open Society Justice Initiative, said UN officials were “ignoring all of
the evidence they now have before them, including from people inside
the court with knowledge of what’s going on”.
“To pretend that
this is a matter of speculation at this point ignores the wealth of
available evidence that no serious investigative action was ever
undertaken in relation to the 003 suspects,” she said.
The
suspects in Case 003 remain officially confidential, though court
documents reveal them as former KR navy commander Meas Mut and air force
commander Sou Met.
Lawyers for former Khmer Rouge Brother No 2
Nuon Chea, set to stand trial later this month in the court’s second
case, also took issue with the UN statement, which referred to their
client as one of “the four remaining leaders of the Khmer Rouge”.
This
statement, the defence team said, presupposes both Nuon Chea’s guilt
and the fact that he and the other Case 002 suspects “are the only
‘leaders’ of the Khmer Rouge still alive”.
Whether the Case 003
suspects also fall into this category “is a matter which is currently
the subject of litigation before the ECCC”, the defence team said.

THE KILLING FIELDS, ONCE SEEN, NEVER FORGOTTEN


'This is a story of war and friendship, of the anguish of a ruined country and of one man's will to live.' - Sydney H Schanberg
Haing S Ngor's vivid portrayal of Dith Pran in The Killing Fields won him an Oscar. In this scene, he has just been captured by the Khmer Rouge.
One film, more than any other, made such an impact on me that I can vividly recall scenes from it without any difficulty at all. That film, which I first saw in 1985, is The Killing Fields, a story of friendship that endured against appalling odds in war-torn Cambodia. Filmed in Thailand on a budget of $15 million, it recounts the true story of Dith Pran, a Cambodian assistant to American journalist Sydney Schanberg of The New York Times. After the fall of Phnom Penh to the Khmer Rouge, Schanberg was allowed to leave while Pran, forced to work long, hard hours in primitive conditions and under the constant threat of death, remained behind. Enduring four and a half years of privation and fear, Pran dramatically escaped across the border with Thailand and was reunited with his friend and mentor Schanberg in a Thai border camp on 9 October 1979, uttering the immortal words, "you came Sydney, you came."
One of the movie's best reviews I've read comes from Peter Reiher, which I've re-produced here to provide a flavour of the film: The Killing Fields is an extraordinarily powerful film, the best new film I've seen this year. It's a strong indictment of modern war in general and the American conduct of the war in Cambodia in particular, but its great strength derives from its secondary themes of the power of friendship and the importance of a will to survive, as well as general comments on accepting responsibility for one's actions. This rich combination of themes is what lifts The Killing Fields above most other films.
The Killing Fields is based on a true story. Sydney Schanberg was the New York Times correspondent to Cambodia during the 70s. He worked closely with his interpreter, Dith Pran, a Cambodian journalist. Together, they exposed many of the US atrocities in Cambodia which resulted from our secret war there, a spillover from the Vietnam War. Sydney and Pran also became good friends, but when Lon Nol's government fell and Pol Pot took over, Schanberg was able to escape and Pran could not. As Schanberg heard more and more of the horrors of the Pol Pot regime, Communism gone mad, he castigated himself more and more for persuading Pran to remain even when it was no longer safe. Meanwhile, Pran struggled to survive in a nation in which 3 million people, out of a population of 7 million, were killed in the course of a few years.
The relationship between the real Dith Pran and Sydney Schanberg is the basis for the film, The Killing Fields.
Above: Dith Pran and Sydney Schanberg
The Killing Fields is composed of three separate segments. First, we see Sydney and Pran at work in war-torn Cambodia. Then, as things fall apart, the journalists seek refuge in the French embassy in Phnom Penh. Finally, Pran tries to stay alive and escape from a hell on earth while Sydney guiltily receives the rewards for their work in the safety of America. The filmmakers deserve much credit for seamlessly binding together three separate stories. The Killing Fields is very much a cohesive entity, yet, running through the individual scenes in one's mind, it is easy to see how even slight carelessness could have made the film into a string of marginally related incidents. Bruce Robinson's script and Roland Joffe's direction combine to form thematic lines which run throughout the film, holding it firmly together. The major weakness of the film, Schanberg's disappearance from the latter third of the film as an effective character, is a limitation of the true story. The filmmakers are to be commended for working within this difficult restriction rather than coming up with a cheap Hollywood rescue mission ending.
Joffe, a BBC director, makes a fine debut. The Killing Fields is very well directed, albeit in a somewhat impersonal style. The shots are well selected, with an emphasis on naturalism. There are few of the flourishes which might expected from a more strong willed director. As might be expected, most of Joffe's most impressive sequences concern atrocities, but these are not presented with the bloodthirsty glee so common in films nowadays. Blood is spilled, people are killed, people are tortured, but Joffe does not show it to us as entertainment. Rather, he makes us see that it an integral part of the story, something we cannot just turn away from, for it explains the tragedy of Cambodia.
Joffe is just the sort of director that appeals to producer David Puttnam. Puttnam, who previously produced Chariots of Fire and several other fine films, is a producer from the old school. His films are really his. Puttnam is the major creative force behind The Killing Fields. The success of the film is due less to individual excellences than inspired balancing of all of its elements. Each creative position has been filled by a fine craftsman who shares the common vision. Puttnam's genius is less for choosing perfect material for films than his ability to see what he wants and find people who can make his vision come to the screen. It may not sound like a very impressive talent, but Puttnam is the only working producer who consistently displays it.
Producer David Puttnam, Director Roland Joffe & Screenplay writer Bruce Robinson.
Above: David Puttnam, Roland Joffe & Bruce Robinson
While all elements of The Killing Fields are laudable, some deserve special attention. The performances of Sam Waterston and Dr. Haing S. Ngor in the leading roles are vital to the film's success. Waterston is a fine actor who combines the rare traits of decency and intelligence. He's been performing in supporting roles in American pictures (The Great Gatsby and Heaven's Gate) and leading roles in British films (Sweet William and Eagle's Wing) for some years, but has never broken through with a major role in a major American picture. He reminds me of James Stewart, with a bit less naivete. I have always liked his work, particularly his role as the narrator of The Great Gatsby. He gives another fine performance in The Killing Fields, delicately balancing ambition and conscience. Dr. Ngor is not a professional actor. Dith Pran is his first role. However, he survived through experiences in Cambodia remarkably similar to Pran's. As a result, the truth of his performance shines through any technical inexperiences. We believe his sufferings and sacrifices, perhaps because he can pull them, direct and horrid, from his own memory.
The supporting cast is also sturdy. John Malkovich, last seen as the blind boarder in Places in the Heart, plays a hot tempered photographer. Such a different role, so convincingly portrayed, is bound to do his career good. Our gain, too, for we can always use more good actors. Craig T. Nelson demonstrates that he has the lock on middle level military authority figures, playing yet another Air Force officer. Fans of Call to Glory can get some cheap kicks figuring out if the character is the same in TV show and movie. It would certainly add some interesting dimensions to the TV show if he were. Athol Fugard and Bill Paterson have fairly small supporting roles as other journalists.
The photography is excellent. Yet again I find myself without the name of a key figure, in this case the cinematographer (ed. it was Chris Menges). He blends the beauty of the Cambodian countryside (actually neighboring Thailand) with the horrors of war. The battle footage is convincingly like documentary footage from Vietnam in style, though better in technical quality. The cinematographer and Joffe deserve credit for not showing us Cambodia as an exotic, foreign place full of incomprehensible things. Rather, they present the similarities amid the differences. We cannot merely dismiss The Killing Fields as more mysterious Asians mistreating each other, and Westerners, for their own inscrutable reasons. We must face their actions as the natural consequences of modern war and fanatical ideology anywhere.
The Killing Fields is not a tutorial on American atrocities in Cambodia. Little time is spent moaning about how we have destroyed the country in our typically heartless American way. None the less, the subtext definitely presents American thoughtlessness and callousness as a primary cause of Cambodia's suffering, and the specific destruction of Cambodia through saturation bombing is far from overlooked. Joffe and Puttnam do not settle for the cheap and popular solution of saying that it's all the fault of the rotten 'ol USA, though. Cambodia owes part of its problems to Vietnam, and part to itself, and The Killing Fields, in the same low key way it points the finger at the US, indicts these other forces.
The human, more than the political, is the core of The Killng Fields. Fundamentally, this is not a film about one war in one place, but about the ravages of war in general. The specific villains are of less concern to the filmmakers than the motives behind the villainy, motives all too common in the world. The success of the film is due to the skillful, but unmanipulative, counterposing of the power of friendship. The Killing Fields is not an easy movie, but it is a very fine one. (Review by Peter Reiher, 1985).
It's a movie that brought the tragedy of the Cambodian holocaust to the attention of the public at large. The star of the film in my opinion was undoubtedly Haing Ngor. A physician by profession, Ngor was imprisoned and tortured by the Khmer Rouge before escaping to Thailand, mirroring almost exactly his portrayal of Dith Pran in the movie (picture below). With no formal acting experience, his masterful performance won him an Oscar as Best Supporting Actor, the first non-actor to do so since 1946. He went onto combine his acting career in films like In Love & War, Iron Triangle, The Dragon Gate and Heaven & Earth with refugee and human rights work before his untimely death in February 1996, murdered by members of a Los Angeles street gang. His powerful autobiography, 'Surviving the Killing Fields', written with Roger Warner in 1988, tells his incredible life story.
Haing Ngor, an Oscar winner for his dramatic portrayal of Dith Pran. Sadly, Ngor was murdered in 1996 by a street gang.An autographed photo of Oscar-winning actor, Haing S Ngor.
The film proved to be a breakthrough for many of the members of the cast and crew. It was director Roland Joffé's first film (up to that time he'd directed only television series in the UK) before he went onto direct The Mission in 1986 and later, City of Joy and Vatel. Sam Waterston (who played Schanberg) and John Malkovich also saw their careers take off. In the film, Malkovich played the legendary photographer Al Rockoff, who can regularly be found in the Foreign Correspondents Club in Phnom Penh (although he was never happy with his portrayal in the film). Julian Sands, who played the part of Jon Swain, later starred in Boxing Helena and Vatel. Swain, a London-based journalist for the Sunday Times, is the author of 'River of Time,' one of my favourite books on Indochina. Of the film, he said, "I owe my life to Dith Pran. How he saved us from certain execution is scrupulously and flawlessly told in this film."
Based on a New York Times Magazine article written by Schanberg, entitled 'The Death and Life of Dith Pran,' the movie was nominated for seven Oscars, winning three (Best Supporting Actor - Haing Ngor; Best Cinematography - Chris Menges; Best Film Editing - Jim Clark), as well as collecting nine British Academy Awards. It's particularly memorable for images of the piercing scream of a child in the midst of battle, a hospital filled with dead and dying children or the evacuation of the entire population of the city of Phnom Penh into the countryside. There's Pran's desperate pleas to their Khmer Rouge captors to save his journalist friends, the soul-destroying failure of a passport photo that could've saved him or his stumbling through a field that has become a mass grave for his countrymen. All of them, vivid and emotional images from a film that helped trigger my own passion in Cambodia.

Cambodia's Khmer Rouge genocide tribunal turned into a public dispute