Sim KaThe Khmer Rouge Trial: Six government officials were subpoenaed. Who is Sim Ka?
Hanoi official must be subpoenaed by the ECCC for genocide against Cambodian people.
October 8, 2009, the Honorable Marcel Lemonde, Co-prosecutor (France) released to the public his subpoena that he has signed on September 25, 2009, to summon six government officials – Senate President Chea Sim, National Assembly President Heng Samrin, Foreign Minister Hor Namhong, Finance Minister Keat Chhon and two CPP senators Ouk Bunchhœun and Sim Ka – appear at the tribunal to provide testimony “in the framework of the investigation under way against Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary, Khieu Samphan and other leaders”.
Two hours after the public announcement of that Lemonde’s subpoena, Marcel Lemonde’s car parked at the ECCC parking lot under the surveillance of Hun Sen’s police have been sabotaged: all the two Lemonde’s car back tires were slashed. It is worth to remember that the same kind of car accidents was happened to Ratha Sourn, Chairman of CACJE and Pengsè Sean, the President of Cambodian Border Committee, the two famous opponents of Hun Sen regime. In Paris, indeed, all the four Péngsè Sean’s car tires were slashed several times; the wind shield was broken, and two times the car was burned down or stolen. In the US, Ratha’s car’s sabotaged. Robert Petit wife and daughter life was threatened.
* * *
The objective of criminal trial is a search for truth. And in criminal trial the term “search for truth” was repeatedly invoked by both sides: the defense and prosecution. Each side claimed that they were searching for truth and the other side was deliberately obscuring it.It is interesting to examine the reaction of Hun Sen and his people to that subpoena of these six CPP officials by the ECCC as witnesses.
[Quote]Pack your bags
The Phnom Penh Post, 09 October, 2009.
A day earlier, government spokesman Khieu Kanharith said that though the individuals could appear in court voluntarily, the government’s position was that they should not give testimony. He said that foreign officials involved in the court could “pack their clothes and return home” if they were not satisfied with the decision. [End Quote]
[Quote] (AFP, Ocoter 9, 2009) PHNOM PENH — The lawyer for a former Khmer Rouge leader on Friday filed a demand that the French investigating judge be disqualified from Cambodia's UN-backed war crimes court for alleged bias.
Michael Karnavas, attorney for ex-Khmer Rouge foreign minister Ieng Sary, said the motion was based on allegations that Marcel Lemonde told subordinates to favour evidence showing suspects' guilt over evidence of their innocence. [End Quote]
The defence team's claims are based on a sworn statement by a former member of the investigating judge's staff.
Wayne Bastin accused his boss, Mr. Lemonde, of instructing his team to concentrate on finding only incriminating evidence.
Under the rules of the tribunal, the investigating judges are supposed to be impartial - and should also seek out evidence which might exonerate defendants.
Mr. Bastin admitted that Ieng Sary's defence team had encouraged him to make the statement.
But he insisted that he had enjoyed a good working relationship with Judge Lemonde - and only came forward because he felt "morally and ethically" obliged.
Ieng Sary's lawyers said the investigating judge had "trampled over" the rights of their client.
The tribunal's pre-trial chamber will now rule on whether Mr. Lemonde should be disqualified.
It has already rejected two attempts to disqualify court officials on the grounds of bias. [End Quote]
* * *
It confirms again and again that Hun Sen’s government had no respect to the ECCC if the ECCC did not behave accordingly to Hun Sen’s whim.It seems suspicious about the timing, why Ieng Sary’s team lawyers release publicly their accusation of bias against Mr. Marcel Lemonde immediately after the release of Lemonde’s subpoena summoning six CPP officials to appear as witnesses for the case 02? Because their effort of disqualification of Lemonde, indeed, will help to protect those six CPP officials from the ECCC prosecution. What kind of alliance was there between Hun Sen and Ieng Sary and Vietnam?
Another crucial aspect of the ECCC (Khmer Rouge Trial) was that Hun Sen’s government tried at all cost to protect his protégés from the legal prosecution by the ECCC, such as the former King Sihanouk, Hun Sen himself, and especially Hanoi government officials who were probably the responsible of Cambodia genocide.
The truth is that most criminal defendants are, in fact, guilty. Prosecutors, therefore, generally have the ultimate truth on their side. But since prosecution witnesses often lies about some facts defense attorneys have intermediate truth on their side.
Since Hun Sen police lie, and evidence doctored by Hanoi, false documents, police planting evidence, police perjury and cover-up, the proof of “the defendant did it” will be turned out to prove the proof is beyond a reasonable doubt that “he did it”, instead.
Henceforth, and consequently, and finally, the ECCC must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of the defendants, or the “probable defendants” King Sihanouk, Hun Sen, Chea Sim, Heng Samrin, Hor Nam Hong, Keat Chhon, Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, Ieng Sary, Ieng Thirith, Kaing Kek Eav and scores of high ranking CPP officials (who were responsible of slaughtering more than 5000 people) and especially Hanoi officials for having perpetrated genocide crime against Cambodia people.
Hanoi officials must be subpoenaed by the ECCC for being the master mind of genocide against Cambodia people.
Because People Army of Vietnam (PAVN) had crushed Lon Nol Army in 1975, yet Hanoi was responsible of Cambodia genocide. Because Pol Pot’s government was appointed by PAVN. It was PAVN which defeated Lon Nol army but not the Khmer Rouge as Hanoi and Khmer Rouge propaganda wanted the world to believe.
What is undeniable is that in 1975 the Khmer Rouge Army had no armament and ammunitions and especially heavy weapons to defeat Lon Nol Army. The Vietnamese had always refused to transport through Ho Chi Minh trails armament and ammunitions for the Khmer Rouge. If they did it, it was done by piece meal, therefore not enough to crush an army.
Because Hanoi army had crushed Lon Nol Army, it was Hanoi Army which appointed Pol Pot government. Therefore, Hanoi had infiltrated in Pol Pot government as they pleased Vietnamese spies, and henchmen to sabotage Pol Pot government as he did right now with Hun Sen government. These Vietnamese henchmen, the Vietnamese cadres, and spies under Hanoi order by executing Hanoi order were the real responsible of genocide against Cambodia people.
Because of police perjury, of manipulated documents, the ECCC must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of Hanoi, in other words, the genocide committed by Hanoi against Cambodian people. Pol Pot government was their compli cit in genocide crime.
Alan M Desershowitz, a Harvard Law professor, describes so well this point.
[Quote]: To understand this multilayered process, and the complex role “truth” plays in it, it is important to know the difference between a criminal trial and other more single-minded searched for truth…The burden of proof in criminal case is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
What is a criminal trial? And how does it differ from a historical or scientific inquiry? The goal of the historian and scientist, at least in theory, is the uncovering or the discovery of truth. The historian seeks to determine what actually happened in the recent or distant past by interviewing witnesses, examining documents and piecing together fragmentary records…
Although there are ethical limits on historical and scientific inquiry, the ultimate test of a given result in these disciplines is its truth or falsity…
Consider the following hypothetical situation. An evil scientific (or historian) beats or bribes some important truth out of a vulnerable source. That truth is then independently tested and confirmed. The evil scientific might be denied his Nobel Price for ethical reasons, but the truth he discovered is no less the truth because of the improper means he employed to arrive at it… But if a fraudulent experiment happened to produce a truth that could be replicated in a non-fraudulent experiment, that truth would ultimately become accepted.
Put another way, there are no “exclusionary rules" in history and science, as there in law…
Finally, all “truths” discovered by science or history are always subjects to reconsideration based on new evidence. There are no prohibitions against “double jeopardy”. Nor are there statutes of limitations. In sum, the historical and scientific is basically a search for objective truth.
The criminal trial is quite different in several important respects. Truth, although one important goal of the criminal trial, is not its only goal. .. The requirement is that guilt must be proved “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But that is inconsistent with the quest for objective truth, because it explicitly prefers one kind of truth to another.
The preferred truth is that the defendant did not do it, and we demand that the jurors err on the side of that truth, even in cases where it is probable that he did do it.
Justice John Harlan said in 1970 Supreme Court Winship decision that, “I view the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case as bottomed on a fundamental value that it is far worse to convict an innocent man than to let a guilty man go free .” As one early-nineteenth-century scholar explained, the maximum of the law … is that it is better than ninety-nine offenders shall escape than one innocent man be condemned.” More typically, the ratio is put at ten to one. [End quote]
* * *
Recapitulation: So, on September 25, 2009, Marcel Lemonde (France), Co-prosecutor of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia (ECCC) had summoned six government officials – Senate President Chea Sim, National Assembly President Heng Samrin, Foreign Minister Hor Namhong, Finance Minister Keat Chhon and two CPP senators Ouk Bunchhœun and Sim Ka – to appear at the ECCC as witnesses.Among the six summoned CPP members, who is hierarchically the most powerful? What is their hierarchy?
The communist regime, such as the Republic Socialist of Vietnam, and its puppet CPP took very important political decisions in secret out of public sight.
Several years ago, in the early 1990s, in Cambodia Embassy at Saigon it was the female cook who was the most powerful member of the Embassy. She was more powerful than the appointed Ambassador.
The most powerful CPP committee is the CPP standing political committee, known as Koor-85. This CPP political committee is the eye and the ear of Hanoi. Koor-85 had left no trace in any CPP publication or public discussion. The ten Koor-85 members are very powerful. It was they who decided everything under Hanoi thumb. They meet together at Hanoi call. Their meeting place had never been in Phnom Penh. Hun Sen is not Koor-85 member. He was just an alternate as Mme Men Sam An. The Koor-85 met always at Chhlong (Kratié province) under a big tree in a revolutionary atmosphere; there was no table; they met around a camp fire under Hanoi officer’s leadership who spoke fluently Cambodian. Then Hanoi officers distributed paper for each member and let them read it very carefully for thirty minutes and asked each one if they understood well the Hanoi order spelled out in the paper. Then the ten members were ordered to execute that Hanoi order. Then they threw that order paper to the fire leaving no written trace of that order. That is always the way the CPP execute Hanoi order to run Cambodia at Hanoi will.
The ten Koor-85 members are in hierarchy descending order: 1. Mat Ly (Muslim, deceased); 2. Sim Ka; 3. Kan Man; 4. Nay Péna; 5. Chea Soth; 6. Say Chhum; 7. Bou Thang (ethnic minority); 8. Say Bou Thang (ethnic minority); 9. Heng Samrin; 10. Chea Sim.
Alternate members: Hun Sen, Men San An.
This political committee was appointed in 1978 when General Lê Duch Anh led his 200,000 soldiers to invade and occupy until today Cambodia in 1978. And Duc Van Anh, the Vietnamese communist Politburo member appointed the Koo-85, the Cambodian Political Standing Committee of ten members since then to run Cambodia under Hanoi thumb.
Under the food chain, Sim Ka must be the very responsible of Cambodia genocide.
* * *
In a criminal trial, we are generally dealing with a decision that must be made under conditions of uncertainty. For example, we will never know with absolute certainty whether O.J. Simpson did murder his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. But doubts persist, even decades later.Those who believe that O.J. Simpson did murder Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman must acknowledge they were not there when the crime occurred or when the evidence was collected and tested. They must rely on the work and the word of people they do not know. So the jurors in O.J. Simpson case were not asked to vote on whether they believed “he did it.” They were asked whether the prosecution’s evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it.
The perception was that the police in communist regime, Republic Socialist of Vietnam and Kingdom of Cambodia often make false arrest, tamper with evidence, evidence planting, false testimony, and faking documents and cover-up and commit perjury.
Hence, there are so many police lie, Hun Sen police lie, and Vietnamese police lie. Therefore, the ECCC cannot base her verdict on these faking documents and faking testimony, and planting evidence and cover-up and perjury.
FOUR KEY POINTS:
Before we go further, the ECCC must inquiry the very simple following key points:
1. YES or NO, are the documents that will be used by the ECCC as basic for the verdict are authentic or not? The ECCC must authenticate first the DC-CAM documents which are the bulk Khmer Rouge documents.
We raise this very crucial question because we have a dozen of witnesses, living abroad and in Cambodia who can prove that DC-CAM documents are bogus. These witnesses had worked for the Vietnamese Security experts to fabricate and manipulate several dozen thousands of documents which would become later DC-CAM/Toul Sleng official documents. Certain technical aspects of the falsification of these Toul Sleng/DC-Cam documents can be proved also by lab, such FBI lab or French, British, German, Japan or Chinese lab. So, first of all, the ECCC must prove the authenticity of these documents by for example the FBI lab.
Suppose for the moment that if it is true that the DC-CAM documents were bogus it will imply that all the books, all the documents and all the scholar researches that were based on these fake documents will produce at the end a false conclusion. The ECCC cannot trust the opinion of these experts because their scholar researches were manipulated by Hanoi directly or indirectly.
2. YES or NO, the Khmer Rouge army did not defeat Lon Nol Army? It was instead the People Army of Vietnam which crushed Lon Nol Army.
If YES, it was Hanoi which appointed Pol Pot government. We saw already what Hanoi have done with Hun Sen government, his Hanoi puppet government. So what Hanoi can do with Hun Sen’ s government Hanoi can do the same way with Pol Pot government. It results that Hanoi was also responsible of Cambodia genocide as was Pol Pot government.
So Hanoi officials must be summoned to the ECCC as defendants.
3. More than one million Cambodian people were killed during 1975-79 in East zone controlled by Heng Samrin, Chea Sim, Hun Sen and Hanoi after the assassination of the East zone commander So Phim by Heng Samrin and Chea Sim. Entire villages were slaughtered and let die of starvation and exhaustion. Hundred of So Phim battalion commanders, living in Cambodia and abroad, still alive, will volunteer to testify the slaughtering of one million people by Heng Samrin, Chea Sim and Hanoi at the ECCC if some security conditions are met.
4. As a rule of thumb, former Khmer Rouge who had participated to the extermination of more than five thousand people were appointed as high ranking officer in Hun Sen government. They changed their names several times. But family victims knew them well. Score of these genocide perpetrators are still in Hun Sen government. The ECCC must build their case of these people. Sixty-four years after the holocaust, the Jews continued to hunt down the genocide perpetrators of Jew people.
0 comments:
Post a Comment