VZCZCXRO3863
OO RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHPF #0410/01 1701015
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 191015Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY PHNOM PENH
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0840
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PHNOM PENH 000410 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS, P, D, DRL 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/17/2019 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL KJUS PTER CB
SUBJECT: SOK AN ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND RULE OF LAW 
 
REF: A. PHNOM PENH 394 
     ¶B. TAKSOE-JENSEN/SWCI AMB WILLIAMSON CORRESPONDENCE 
        (6/11/09) 
 
Classified By: AMBASSADOR CAROL A. RODLEY FOR REASONS 1.4 (B, D) 
 
¶1.  (C) SUMMARY: In a June 12 meeting to deliver a UN 
proposal on an anti-corruption mechanism at the Khmer Rouge 
Tribunal to Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Council 
of Ministers Sok An (Ref B), the Ambassador repeated earlier 
remarks on her duty to speak out against corruption on behalf 
of U.S. interests (Ref A).  DPM Sok An launched into a 
defense of the Royal Government of Cambodia's (RGC) use of 
the "rule of law" through defamation law suits to counter the 
lies and distortions of government critics.  Noting the ill 
intentions of some groups to bring down the government, he 
said that sometimes stronger measures were needed to protect 
stability and the safety and security of the people.  He 
referred to the recent incident of students sending SMS texts 
calling for a demonstration against the government over 
Angkor Wat.  He also drew a loose comparison to the anti-Thai 
riots of 2003 as one among a number of reasons to keep the 
lid tight on freedoms of expression and assembly.  Sok An 
noted that foreign minister Hor Namhong did not know what to 
do about the Ambassador's remarks on corruption, and so was 
avoiding seeing her. END SUMMARY. 
 
Concern About Threats; Reaction Emphasizes Control 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
 
¶2.  (C) Adding to remarks she had made to Om Yentieng on June 
11 (Ref A), the Ambassador expressed serious concern that 
recent RGC statements seemed intended to threaten or 
intimidate critics of the government.  Sok An replied that 
the RGC very clearly respected freedom of expression -- all 
the media was totally free to say what they wanted, he said. 
There was no censorship prior to publication.  Having freedom 
of the press was a big accomplishment; however, there needed 
to be checks and balances, he added.  In all countries where 
individuals were free they had to behave themselves and 
regulate their conduct, he noted.  Sok An emphasized that 
when people abuse these rights it could have a negative 
impact on society.  With the rule of law there is no threat, 
and those who sue are not threatening freedom of expression, 
they are just doing their duty.  If people were free to 
violate the law, what would happen to democracy, he inquired. 
 He went on state that without the rule of law, you have 
anarchy. 
 
¶3.  (C) Stating that free elections and freedom of the press 
are fundamental to democracy, Sok An emphasized that the RGC 
allows both.  But if the rights are abused and the law is 
violated then the perpetrators must be punished.  In this 
case, Sok An expressed doubt that lawsuits represented a 
threat to the freedom of expression. 
 
¶4.  (C) Referring to the activities of Radio Free Asia and 
the Voice of America to "twist" information, Sok An said 
there were "hostile campaigns" to "do bad things" against the 
government.  In this "wrong" campaign against the government, 
the media "tell lies," he averred.  When there is such a 
campaign to discredit the government, based on lies, then he 
cannot agree that the RGC's reaction is a threat to the 
freedom of information.  Rather than filing lawsuits, the 
Ambassador urged the RGC to reiterate the truth and have more 
confidence in the public's ability to make distinctions.  Sok 
An, however, maintained the critics "still attack, they 
always attack."  When the Ambassador urged that political 
speech ought to allow for exchanges of views in which the 
people could weigh the evidence and decide for themselves, 
Sok An responded that the reality in Cambodia is far 
different from the reality in the U.S. 
 
Lies Lead to Public Disorder 
---------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (C) Harping on the theme of lies leading to public 
disorder, Sok An related the recent case of complaints 
against the lighting structures installed at Angkor Wat which 
had raised a public furor over the partial destruction of the 
country's ancient heritage.  He said that students had sent 
SMS texts saying "you should go to demonstrate against the 
government."  The RGC was very upset with this movement. 
Even when the RGC attempted to explain, the critics 
stimulated anger against the government, all from lies, he 
complained.  Citing the January 2003 anti-Thai riots sparked 
by the single comment of a Thai actress about Angkor Wat, he 
said comments in Cambodia can lead to mass riots.  In the 
U.S., this is not the case, he said.  The borders were 
another issue that could inflame public opinion and lead to 
rioting, he said.  Such issues can kill stability, peace and 
 
PHNOM PENH 00000410  002 OF 002 
 
 
security in Cambodia, thus there must be rule of law, he 
reasoned. 
 
¶6.  (C) Drawing an analogy with the U.S. Congress's adoption 
of the Patriot Act soon after the 9/11 attack, Sok An said 
that the RGC also had to react with strong legislation to 
"threats" such as lies about Angkor or the border.  The 
threat to stability and security could increase if the RGC 
did not take action within the framework of the rule of law. 
Sok An asserted that the RGC's actions are not a repression 
of freedom of expression but politicians must protect the 
country.  Such actions will ameliorate the threats to peace 
and security and make freedom of expression more professional 
and positive.  The RGC cannot allow freedom of expression to 
go against the supreme interests of the country, he added, 
reasoning that the laws in Cambodia are like the laws the 
U.S. Congress adopted to preserve stability, security, and 
the safety of the people, even if there is less overall 
freedom of expression. 
 
Reaction to Corruption 
----------------------- 
 
¶7.  (C) Turning to the RGC's reaction to the Ambassador's 
corruption statements, Sok An stated that he routinely has 
frank discussions with donors about how to reduce corruption. 
 In these closed settings, he explains the tough action the 
RGC takes.  However, the RGC does not want to make the same 
mistake Hong Kong made by taking very strong action which 
caused the police to riot against the government.  Sok An 
stated that his aide has finished the draft anti-corruption 
law using experience gleaned from trips to Hong Kong, 
Malaysia, and Singapore.  Citing the potential for a strong 
backlash, he stated the anti-corruption process would move 
forward very slowly.  Therefore, such a public statement is 
interpreted as an offense, and Hor Namhong is trying to work 
out how to respond which is why he has not yet agreed to meet 
with the Ambassador.  Sok An stated that, although Hor 
Namhong is "very frustrated," his response will be moderate 
and balanced. 
 
¶8.  (C) COMMENT:  In this very difficult and contentious 
meeting the DPM gave no ground in the face of the 
Ambassador's strong representations urging an end to the 
government's aggressive rhetoric and actions against its 
critics.  Sok An's account of the anti-Thai riots 
conveniently puts aside the fact that the genesis for those 
violent events was considered to have had the implicit 
support of the RGC, before inflamed crowds got out of control 
and set fire to the Thai embassy and Thai businesses, ending 
in the destruction of property valued at over $30 million. 
Clearly control of the message remains a central theme of the 
government, which appears to brook no opposition. 
Additionally, there are no signs the RGC is prepared to back 
down to international pressure including a strong statement 
by the UN, with the Prime Minister himself dismissing claims 
that the lawsuits threaten freedom of expression.  In a 
recent speech, Hun Sen stated that the court "is a ruler who 
defines who is right or wrong.  There is only the court.  Why 
can't we use it?"  He went on to call on Sok An to ask 
lawyers to continue suing critics of the government adding 
that "we will also file complaints against NGOs."  END 
COMMENT. 
RODLEY