VZCZCXRO4273
OO RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHPF #0549/01 2161313
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 041313Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY PHNOM PENH
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1016
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PHNOM PENH 000549 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS, P, D, DRL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL KJUS CB
SUBJECT: MU SOCHUA LIABLE FOR DEFAMATION 
 
REF: PHNOM PENH 514 AND PREVIOUS 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED 
 
¶1.  (SBU) SUMMARY: The Phnom Penh Municipal Court pronounced 
Mu Sochua liable for defaming Prime Minister Hun Sen on 
August 4, closing this chapter of the long-running drama. 
International observers attended the session to hear the 
verdict, though police denied entry to NGO representatives 
and journalists.  Judge Sem Sakola ordered Mu Sochua to pay a 
fine of 8.5 million riels ($2,125 USD), with additional 
compensation to the Prime Minister (PM) of 8 million riels 
($2,000 USD).  At the eleventh hour, Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) 
leadership reversed its decision to pay the fine 
automatically, declaring the decision on next steps would be 
left to Mu Sochua, who needs "time to think."  Sam Rainsy and 
Mu Sochua led over 100 SRP supporters in a march through 
Phnom Penh's streets to protest today's verdict, ending in a 
large scuffle.  Police arrested two SRP supporters, but 
released them within an hour following intervention by SRP 
leaders.  END SUMMARY. 
 
------------ 
The Verdict 
------------ 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Reading from a written verdict, Judge Sem Sakola 
noted that Mu Sochua availed herself of the opportunity to 
remain silent during the July 24 hearing.  The judge stated 
that her verdict was, therefore, based on prior evidence 
submitted during the investigatory period - primarily the 
video of Mu's April 23 press conference, Mu's statement to 
the investigating prosecutor from June 3, letters written by 
Mu to international organizations, and letters written by 
those organizations to the PM.  (NOTE: Most, though not all, 
the letters were public information, published in newspapers 
and on the Internet.  END NOTE.) 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The judge stated that she heard Mu, in the 
videotaped press conference, claim that the PM's April 4 
comments adversely affected the honor and dignity of all 
Cambodian women.  Adapting language from arguments made by 
the PM's lawyer, Ky Tech, the judge announced that the April 
4 comments referred only to one woman, and not by name; 
therefore, Mu's press conference claim was an intentional 
insult to the PM.  The judge remarked on the angry tone of 
letters written by international women's organizations to the 
PM, citing this as evidence that Mu's appeals to those 
organizations were also defamatory. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) The judge sentenced Mu to pay 8,500,000 riels 
(approximately $2,125 USD) as a fine, and ordered an 
additional 8,000,000 riels ($2,000 USD) in direct 
compensation to the PM.  This is possible under the 
French-based legal system in Cambodia, where complaints 
originate as civil action between parties, but where courts 
may pursue concurrent criminal charges.  The double fine is 
the result of a verdict on both the criminal and civil 
complaints simultaneously. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Government prosecutor Sok Kalyan requested in his 
July 24 closing statement that the court require Mu to pay 
fees associated with publicizing the verdict through the 
media.  Citing the public nature of the July 24 hearing 
(which was open to the press), and the amount of publicity 
the case had already received, the judge declined to assess 
additional penalties for publicizing the verdict. 
 
--------------------- 
SRP Reverses Position 
--------------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Local media carried the story the morning of August 
4 that the SRP had changed its position on the Mu Sochua 
case, and would not automatically pay any fine assessed 
against her.  Post confirmed with SRP sources that the Party 
decided the night of August 3 to let Mu Sochua decide on her 
own whether to pay the fine, or whether to appeal the 
decision.  The SRP had affirmed, as late as the morning of 
August 3, that they intended to pay any fine stemming from 
the case and not to appeal.  That decision was supposed to 
help the Party close the case and move forward with a "more 
mature strategy" for the future.  Saying Mu Sochua needed 
"time to think," a Party source said they will likely confirm 
on August 5 their support for whatever decision Mu Sochua may 
make on an appeal. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) The SRP issued a joint statement with the Human 
Rights Party immediately following the verdict.  The 
statement noted the Parties' belief that Mu did not defame 
 
PHNOM PENH 00000549  002 OF 002 
 
 
the PM, that the government failed to present evidence 
supporting the defamation charge, and that the case 
demonstrates the bias of the court. 
 
------------------------------ 
Mu Supporters March in Protest 
------------------------------ 
 
¶8.  (SBU) Immediately after the court adjourned, Mu Sochua, 
Sam Rainsy, and fellow SRP Parliamentarians answered press 
questions, then led a protest march from the gates of the 
Municipal Court toward SRP Headquarters.  Holding a large 
candle, Mu led the march down the street, smiling despite the 
adverse ruling.  The 100-200 supporters encountered had a few 
scuffles with police during the march, culminating in a large 
confrontation near the Wat Lanka pagoda.  Two supporters, an 
SRP member and a bodyguard, were arrested and detained at a 
police station for questioning.  But police released them an 
hour later after three SRP MPs and several human rights NGOs 
requested their release.  No serious injuries were reported. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) Mu Sochua is scheduled to depart Phnom Penh the 
afternoon of August 5 for work and vacation in Canada and the 
United States.  Due to her role leading this unannounced and 
unapproved protest march, she asked that the Embassy observe 
her departure.  She is an American citizen; the Embassy will 
send a consular officer to monitor from a distance Mu's 
departure at the airport to mitigate any problems that may 
arise as a result of today's actions. 
 
---------------------------------- 
NGOs and Media Barred from Session 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶10.  (SBU) In stark contrast to the relative chaos of the 
July 24 hearing, the court and police prepared for the 
possibility of disturbances on August 4 by numbering seats in 
advance, and distributing assigned seating tickets in the 
gallery.  While diplomatic observers and several SRP MPs and 
staff entered without problems, no journalists or NGO 
representatives received access to the courtroom. 
International observers included representatives of the U.S., 
UK, Australian, German, and Danish missions, and an observer 
from the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Poloff saw at least 50 police officers from 3 
different units in and around the courthouse - Cambodian 
National Police regulars, traffic police, and a heavily-armed 
unit in black paramilitary uniforms with arm patches 
identifying them as criminal judicial police.  Court officers 
appeared to be working from a list of approved observers as 
they distributed seating assignments. 
 
-------------------- 
Lawyer Not Penalized 
-------------------- 
 
¶12.  (SBU) The judge assessed no penalty against Mu Sochua's 
former lawyer, Kang Sam Onn, noting letters to the court from 
Ky Tech regarding the PM's acceptance of Kang Sam Onn's 
apology, and from Kang Sam Onn reiterating his acknowledgment 
of wrong-doing. 
 
-------- 
COMMENT 
-------- 
 
¶13.  (SBU) What should have been the end of the defamation 
battles between the PM and Mu Sochua is now just a pause 
before the next chapter begins.  The SRP had publicly touted 
its new way forward in recent weeks, but the 
non-confrontational SRP seems to have been short-lived. 
Today's protest march, and the decision to allow Mu to decide 
whether to continue her fight against the PM, gives evidence 
of a rift within the SRP over its intentions to pursue a new 
course; the Party may have played that card in an effort to 
influence the court and public opinion. 
 
¶14.  (SBU) In the overall context of political speech, the 
more serious cases of disinformation still in the courts, and 
the addition of several incitement cases against NGO 
representatives in land-related cases, show that some 
high-ranking leaders have no intention of backing down in the 
face of critical attacks against them.  END COMMENT. 
RODLEY