The onslaught on the burgeoning democracy in Cambodia has moved from the office of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, Surya Subedi to one of the Human Rights advocate NGOs called the Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (Comfrel), which had issued recently a report titled “Democracy, Elections and Reform in Cambodia,” reported by The Cambodia Daily, 12 March 2013, under its title “Election Group Highlights Fragile State of Democracy.” It was not a continuation or an addition of Subedi’s 16 July 2012 Report, but a repetition, a copy of the same things somehow said differently. If it was true as Comfrel was quoted by The Cambodia Daily that “limitations of freedoms observed in 2011continued apace last year,” Comfrel would not have the “freedoms” to carry-on the dissemination of Subedi to-be-considered divine words for Comfrel.
“Freedoms” advocated by Subedi and written as a UN’s report can be summarized into a few sentences, but the fertility of his mind took him to lengthen the report to 17 pages:
- “Freedoms” to attack, criticize, slander and fault the government verbally or in print for requiring its citizens to respect the rule of law, to be aware of that “freedoms” and responsibilities must go hand in hand, at the risks of being unpopular and losing a few votes at the poll.
- No mentioning of – even forgetting about encouraging citizens to talk about – civic responsibilities of the citizens, but highlight again and again that “the Government must ensure high standards in line with its international rights obligations before, during and after casting the votes,” voluntarily veiling a very offensive contempt towards the democratic system of the government in Cambodia by saying that The Law on the Election, and other laws “generally provide a workable framework and largely conform, at least on paper, to international standards and establish the necessary institutions for the conduct of elections.” - Ref par 48 and par 49 of the Report.
- Bluntly accusing the government of having no working capacity, saying that “the problem lies in the inadequate implementation of the legal provisions,” suggesting perhaps Cambodia must turn the clock back at least twenty years and beg the UN to come back to run the election again, or let Cambodia plunge into factional in-fighting again, so that the UN can come back, or force Cambodia to bend “to the domestic and international pressures to reform the election system, neither substantial reforms were made nor existing laws implemented,” said Comfrel, with the sole purpose of dictating the will of outsiders on Cambodia as Subedi has been insisting( par.82 of the Report) that Sam Rainsy has been convicted on charges that are allegedly politically motivated, and a political solution should be found to enable him, as the leader of the opposition, to play a full role in Cambodian politics, to be repeated by The Cambodia Daily, saying that “a refusal by the government to allow Mr. Rainsy to return and contest the elections could lead to social unrest.”
The building up of a chain to carry out the movement to elevate and re-enlist Rainsy in Cambodia’s political affairs, despite Rainsy’s criminal conviction and his unelectable and unfit- to-vote status, according to Cambodia’s rule of law is a classic case of “planting the seeds”of some kinds of a “spring,” one of which had been made famous, however degenerate into chaos some time later. Comfrel is one link of the chain. What will be or who will be the next link?
Recently, the warning that “Rainsy himself will start a strong movement to topple any government formed by the election” as reported by AFP on 12 March 2013, – for not allowing him to compete due to the fact that he is a convicted felon on the run to avoid imprisonment- is undoubtedly a call to insurrection and war. What would Comfrel and Subedi were going to say or were going to do about this? It would likely that they congratulate Rainsy, I presumed.
14 March 2013
Professor Pen Ngoeun
Advisor,
University of Puthisastra, Cambodia