VZCZCXRO5563
OO RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHPF #0514/01 2051116
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 241116Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY PHNOM PENH
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0976
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 PHNOM PENH 000514 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS, P, D, DRL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL KJUS KWMN CB
SUBJECT: MU SOCHUA DEFENDS HERSELF; NO VERDICT UNTIL AUGUST 
4 
 
REF: A. PHNOM PENH 492 
     ¶B. PHNOM PENH 413 AND PREVIOUS 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED 
 
¶1.  (SBU) SUMMARY:  Mu Sochua appeared July 24 before the 
Phnom Penh Municipal Court to defend herself against the 
Prime Minister's defamation allegations.  Over 100 observers 
packed the small court room, including the Ambassador and 
representatives of several Embassies, Cambodian human rights 
NGOs, and journalists.  The prosecutor and the Prime 
Minister's personal lawyer, Ky Tech, alleged that Mu Sochua 
knowingly intended to insult the Prime Minister during her 
April 23 press conference.  Mu Sochua defended herself with 
an appeal for justice on behalf of all Cambodia's women.  The 
judge recessed the hearing and the crowd dispersed; then, in 
an atypical move, the judge announced to a nearly empty 
courtroom that no verdict would be announced until August 4 
at 8:00 a.m. 
 
----------------------- 
International Attention 
----------------------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Ambassador Rodley attended the hearing to 
demonstrate U.S. interest in the Royal Government of 
Cambodia's (RGC) recent actions constricting freedom of 
expression, and in particular a case involving an American 
citizen.  She was joined by Ambassador Frank Mann of Germany 
and British Charge D'Affaires Elizabeth Evans.  The 
Australian and Danish missions sent political officers to the 
hearing, as did the United Nations Office of the High 
Commission on Human Rights.  The Inter-Parliamentary Union 
(IPU), a Geneva-based membership organization of parliaments 
and parliamentarians, appointed Franklin Drilon, the former 
president of the Philippines Senate, as a dlegate to observe 
the hearing. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) turned out in force to 
support their member, including party president Sam Rainsy. 
Over 30 SRP members and their supporters crowded into the 
already packed courtroom at exactly 8:00 a.m., holding lit 
candles overhead as they entered.  A small scuffle broke out 
when police first tried to prevent SRP members from bringing 
the lit candles into the courtroom and then barred the entry 
of additional supporters trying to squeeze into the chamber. 
Several Cambodian NGOs came in large numbers to view the 
hearing, including the Cambodian League for the Promotion and 
Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO), the Cambodian Human Rights 
and Development Association (ADHOC), and the Cambodian Center 
for Human Rights (CCHR). 
 
-------------------- 
Representing Herself 
-------------------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) As stated in several local media reports before the 
hearing, Mu Sochua represented herself during the hearing. 
Judge Sem Sakola began the hearing by reading Mu Sochua her 
rights.  When she reached the part about the right to an 
attorney, Mu Sochua announced that she had no lawyer because 
the government had persecuted her lawyer to the point where 
he was forced to resign.  Mu said she had tried but failed to 
find another lawyer, because no one was willing to take her 
case. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The judge responded to Mu Sochua's complaint by 
pointing out that the defamation charge is considered a 
misdemeanor, since it carries no prison penalties; therefore, 
under Article 301 of the Cambodian Criminal Procedure Code, 
the court bears no obligation to provide Mu Sochua with a 
lawyer if she cannot find her own.  At the court's 
invitation, Ky Tech noted that there were more than 600 
lawyers in Cambodia, and that Mu Sochua had more than enough 
time to find a new lawyer after her previous attorney 
withdrew from the case on July 8.  He and the prosecutor also 
both denied that Mu's previous lawyer, Kang Sam Onn, had been 
persecuted or threatened in any way.  (NOTE:  These comments 
appeared designed to deflect any potential criticism that the 
hearing should be delayed until Mu Sochua could find new 
representation.  END NOTE.) 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Mu Sochua subsequently declined to answer any 
questions from the judge or prosecutor.  The judge continued 
to ask Mu to confirm testimony given to the prosecutor in 
June with her lawyer present and statements made in public, 
but Mu refused.  The judge also reminded Mu that she had the 
right to request a new judge, if Mu felt Judge Sem Sakola was 
not treating the case fairly.  Mu did not avail herself of 
 
PHNOM PENH 00000514  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
this opportunity, and told Judge Sem to continue presiding 
over the case. 
 
----------------------- 
Intentionally Insulting 
----------------------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Both the prosecutor, Sok Kalyan, and Ky Tech 
alleged that Mu Sochua purposefully intended to defame the 
Prime Minister during her April 23 press conference.  Ky Tech 
narrated a long list of reasons why Mu Sochua had knowingly 
insulted the Prime Minister.  He stated that although Mu 
Sochua claimed the Prime Minister had injured her reputation, 
she had only requested 500 Riel (approximately 12 cents USD) 
in compensation, which he considered insufficient to back up 
Mu Sochua's claim that her honor had been tarnished.  He 
noted that Mu Sochua continually expanded the Prime 
Minister's April 4 comments to encompass all Cambodian women, 
claiming that Mu was attempting to make Cambodia's women 
"hate" the Prime Minister.  In this context, he also used the 
word "incitement" (NOTE:  a much more serious charge than 
defamation.  END NOTE.).  He also pointed out that Kang Sam 
Onn apologized in writing to the Prime Minister, admitting he 
made a mistake in representing Mu's case, which Ky Tech 
claimed meant by extension Mu Sochua was also wrong.  The 
prosecutor added that Mu's efforts to attract public support 
for her case, from international women's organizations and 
from the IPU, were further attempts to damage the Prime 
Minister's and Cambodia's reputation both nationally and 
internationally. 
 
--------- 
Evidence? 
--------- 
 
¶8.  (SBU) If either side, during the preliminary submissions 
of briefs, had offered evidence on the question of knowledge 
or intent -- to support or refute the claim that Mu 
negligently or intentionally defamed the Prime Minister -- 
its placement in the case file was not indicated during the 
hearing.  With Mu Sochua refusing to answer questions, or 
even acknowledge her prior statements to the court, the judge 
had Mu's June 3 statement to court investigators read into 
the transcript of the day's hearing, along with that of Kang 
Sam Onn.  When Mu refused to answer a question about how the 
Prime Minister's April 4 speech had affected her honor, the 
judge permitted a video of the April 23 press conference to 
be played in court.  The court clerk also read several 
letters into the court record, including Kang Sam Onn's 
letter of apology to the Prime Minister.  Conspicuously 
missing from the hearing was any version of the Prime 
Minister's April 4 speech, or his June 8 statement to 
prosecutors during questioning in his office at the Council 
of Ministers.  (NOTE:  The full case file is confiden 
tial, so while these documents may be part of the file the 
judge reviews, they will not become part of the public 
record.  END NOTE.) 
 
----------------- 
Final Statements 
----------------- 
 
¶9.  (SBU) The prosecutor concluded his arguments by asking 
the judge to consider the evidence against Mu Sochua under 
Article 63 on defamation, one of the provisions dating back 
to the UN Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC).  He 
also asked that the verdict be released publicly, and that 
the judge require publication and posting of the verdict in 
newspapers and media sources, and that all legal costs be at 
the defendant's expense.  Article 63 of the UNTAC Code 
permits these charges, if the defendant is found guilty, up 
to 10 million Riel (approximately $2,500 USD), in addition to 
any fine. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Judge Sem then invited Mu Sochua to provide her 
closing argument.  Mu repeatedly stated that she "is a 
woman...a Khmer woman...who only wants justice."  She 
mentioned being happy to learn, from the court summons 
letter, that the judge in the case would be a woman, and 
appealed directly to Judge Sem as a fellow educated Cambodian 
woman to provide justice.  Mu turned frequently to face the 
audience, and was reminded by the judge to address comments 
to the court, though Mu continued to toss comments over her 
shoulder directed at the many observers present in the 
courtroom.  She announced that she was representing all the 
female parliamentarians present, and ultimately all Cambodian 
women in this case, ending with a final plea for justice and 
dignity. 
 
 
PHNOM PENH 00000514  003 OF 003 
 
 
¶11.  (SBU) As the hearing ended, the judge initially stated 
she would hear the next case on her docket, then was 
interrupted as dozens of people noisily exited the courtroom. 
 Outside the courtroom, a scrum of reporters immediately 
surrounded Mu Sochua and others, loudly shouting questions. 
The judge appeared to consider for a few minutes, then told 
the nearly empty courtroom that she would postpone hearing 
the third case and that a verdict in Mu's case would be 
announced August 4 at 8:00 a.m.  (NOTE: It's common for 
judges to hear all the cases in the morning docket, then 
deliver a verdict in all cases at the same time, before 
breaking for lunch.  END NOTE.) 
 
------------ 
NGO Reaction 
------------ 
 
¶12.  (SBU) Following the hearing, Poloff consulted a few of 
the NGOs present to assess immediate reaction to the hearing. 
 LICADHO stated that the most important issue is that a 
group, or in this case a person, was unable to secure a 
lawyer without being subjected to undue pressure by the 
government.  LICADHO's Director said the procedural errors in 
the trial were minimal, but that the prosecution failed in 
the hearing to provide any evidence of their charges.  She 
also mentioned Ky Tech's use of the word "incitement," 
voicing concern that the judge may try to add that charge 
against Mu Sochua before the verdict is issued.  Going 
forward, the Director said LICADHO would be concerned with 
the implications of a potential guilty finding on Mu Sochua's 
ability to regain her parliamentary immunity, or continue her 
work as an MP.  (NOTE:  Restoration of immunity requires a 
National Assembly vote.  The Prime Minister is already on the 
record stating it would "be very hard" to restore Mu Sochua's 
immunity in a CPP-controlled National Assembly because others 
in the CPP were against such a move.  END NOTE.) 
 
¶13.  (SBU) CCHR's president, Ou Virak, said he was surprised 
by the judge's decision to delay issuing a verdict, calling 
it "very unusual."  He believed the delay was an indication 
that the judge wanted time for political consultation before 
making a decision.  He stated that the prosecution's 
arguments were quite weak, and "without legal merit."  He, 
too, mentioned the possibility of the incitement charge being 
added, but thought it would be difficult for the judge to 
justify that move, since she did not specifically state she 
wanted more time to consider additional charges. 
 
------- 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶14.  (SBU) The July 24 hearing was as much political theater 
as it was judicial exercise, as evidenced by the SRP drama 
with the candles.  The defamation charge under Article 63 is 
very broadly defined (see PHNOM PENH 273).  Nonetheless, the 
prosecution failed to provide any evidence of negligence or 
malicious intent, at least at the hearing. Ky Tech's 
statements insinuated intent only.  The defense missed a real 
opportunity, though, by playing up the political and failing 
to refute the charges in any substantive way.  By refusing to 
answer questions, Mu Sochua allowed the prosecution to define 
the case, such as it was. 
 
¶15.  (SBU) The fact that the judge chose to postpone her 
ruling lends credence to the belief, by NGOs and some in the 
international community, that many in the Cambodian judiciary 
lack independence and are beholden to the CPP. 
RODLEY