VZCZCXRO3476
RR RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHPF #0408/01 0720949
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 130949Z MAR 07
FM AMEMBASSY PHNOM PENH
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8179
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1581
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2215

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PHNOM PENH 000408 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EAP/MLS, DRL, AND EAP/RSP 
DEPARTMENT PASS TO USAID/ANE AND USAID/DCHA/DG FOR MARIA 
RENDON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL CB
SUBJECT: PROMINENT HUMAN RIGHTS LEADERS DISCUSS PROGRESS OF 
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION 
 
REF: 06 PHNOM PENH 1871 
 
 ¶1.  (SBU)  Summary.  Kek Galabru, president of LICADHO, a 
local human rights NGO and Margo Picken, head of the Cambodia 
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human 
Rights (UNOHCHR), recently discussed the latest developments 
as Cambodian civil society and the Cambodian government 
discuss creating a national human rights commission.  In 
early February, five representatives of civil society and 
five representatives of the government agreed that civil 
society should draft the law providing the legal framework 
for a commission.  The NGOs have appointed a sub-committee to 
refine the existing draft law and plan extensive public 
consultations throughout Cambodia to discuss the role of a 
National Commission.  Galabru admitted that she thought the 
government's current flexibility had more to do with the 
coming elections than a change of heart on bettering the 
human rights situation in Cambodia.  Picken also voiced 
reservations about RGC intentions but offered to help with 
the establishment of the commission by bringing experts to 
Cambodia to work with NGO and government representatives. 
She warned that the commission -- to be effective -- would 
need a much more supportive enabling environment, 
particularly with regard to Cambodia's weak judiciary.   End 
Summary. 
 
Cambodia and a National Human Rights Commission 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶2.  (U)  On February 7, after a four-month period of 
inactivity, Cambodian civil society and government 
representatives met to discuss the proposed national human 
rights commission.  Cambodian civil society was represented 
by Kem Sokha of the Cambodian Center on Human Rights (who has 
since launched a political party), Sok Sam Oeun of the 
Cambodian Defenders Project, Young Kim Eng, the former 
executive director of the Khmer Youth Association, Nhiek 
Sarin of Star Kampuchea and Kek Galabru of the local human 
rights NGO LICADHO.  The Cambodian government was represented 
by Prime Minister Hun Sen's advisor Om Yentieng and four 
people from his human rights subcommittee.  The two sides 
agreed that Cambodian civil society representatives should 
draft the necessary legislation with help from a Western 
advisor. 
 
¶3.  (U)  Although Cambodian civil society already has a 
draft, the NGO reps named a subcommittee comprised of members 
of their respective organizations as well as Yeng Virak of 
the Community Legal Education Center (CLEC).  The 
subcommittee will continue to refine the existing draft and 
conduct extensive public consultations throughout Cambodia to 
gain grassroots support for a National Commission.  The NGOs 
have also agreed to move the process slowly and thoroughly. 
They plan to disperse the draft throughout Cambodia's 24 
provinces for comments as well as to explain to the public 
what a national human rights commission will do.  In 
September 2006 when the issue of a national human rights 
commission first was proposed by Kem Sokha, a one-year 
process was envisioned to draft and pass the necessary 
legislation and stand up the commission (reftel).  NGOs 
believe a three-year drafting and adoption process is more 
realistic; RGC representatives believe that their side only 
needs three months to examine the proposed legislation with 
help from the Council of Ministers and the Council of Jurists 
before adoption by the National Assembly.  Galabru claims 
that the RGC is being too flexible in its approach, which may 
change after the April 1 commune elections.  To pay for the 
process, civil society plans to ask donors for help; although 
not finalized, Galabru thought USD 100,000 would be adequate 
to pay for drafting and dissemination of the law for comment 
throughout Cambodia.  NGOs intend to ask the local branch of 
the Price Waterhouse Coopers office to manage the funds; 
Galabru thought that the UNOHCHR office could help with the 
technical aspects of the legislation but was open to having 
the UN manage the funds as long as the process did not become 
too bureauratic. 
 
¶4.  (U)  Margo Picken voiced reservations about the proposed 
commission, although her organization remains committed to 
supporting its establishment.  Given that the UN Human Rights 
Council is considering the termination of country-focused 
mandates like that of Cambodia, helping Cambodia establish a 
national human rights commission may be an idea whose time 
has come.  On the other hand, Picken maintains that a 
credible national commission requires an enabling 
 
PHNOM PENH 00000408  002 OF 002 
 
 
environment, particularly in the form of transparent and 
independent courts.  She sees little RGC progress towards 
that goal; on the contrary, the RGC continues to consolidate 
power and undermine the country's supposedly independent 
institutions.  Picken said that by leaving the drafting of 
the required legislation to the NGOs, the government would 
try to play off one NGO against another in the process. 
Whereas Galabru wanted NGOs and RGC representatives to attend 
regular meetings of the ASEAN and Asia-Pacific human rights 
commissions, Picken's office has proposed a seminar where 
experts could be brought to Cambodia to talk about what is 
necessary for the establishment of the commission.  Picken 
also mentioned that a good precedent for the human rights 
commission would be a new independent body that the RGC is 
due to establish to monitor prison conditions as a result of 
the January 2007 adoption of the Optional Protocol to the 
Convention on Torture.  If this new body proves to be truly 
independent and effective, it could bode well for the 
proposed national human rights commission. 
 
¶5.  (U)  Comment.  Although the new slower pace by which the 
NGOs propose to draft and refine legislation for the national 
human rights commission is a welcome sign, we agree with 
UNOHCHR's view that without an enabling environment, 
particularly in the area of judicial reform, a national human 
rights commission may not be an effective instrument.  NGO 
representatives are not entering into the process lightly, 
and have reserved the right to withdraw if they sense the RGC 
is not living up to its end of the bargain.  For that reason, 
none of the prominent NGO leaders involved in the drafting 
process has yet stated that he/she is willing to join the 
commission once it is operational, as all have been let down 
by RGC promises in the past.  The prospect of an effective 
national human rights commission that has broad grassroots 
support, however, is tempting and the NGOs believe that as 
long as the RGC has opened the door to that possibility, they 
should push the door and pressure the government to live up 
to its commitment.  End Comment. 
 
MUSSOMELI