On Sep 23, 3:46 pm, "Sam Rainsy Party of North America" <[email protected]> wrote: > Exiled Cambodian Leader Sentenced to 10 Years in Jail > > Exiled Cambodian opposition party leader Sam Rainsy who has been convicted by > a court for falsifying documents related to a contentious border dispute with > Vietnam. >
Misleading accusation with no supported facts. They were not convicted for falsifying anything. They were convicted for destroying the border demarkation. That is fact. > The leader of Cambodia's main opposition party, Sam Rainsy, was sentenced to > prison in a dispute about the border with neighboring Vietnam. But his > supporters claim the case is politically motivated. > It may be a political motivated. Yet, the court could prove easily because Sam Rainsy and his followers did removed the border demarkation with their own hand to demonstrate about a disputed land. They chose to go that way instead of using diplomacy. > The municipal court in Phnom Penh on Thursday handed down a 10-year prison > sentence to Rainsy because he displayed a map that had a different border > between Cambodia and Vietnam than the one the government uses. During his > trial earlier this month, the government's lawyer told the court that Sam > Rainsy's action amounted to disinformation and falsifying of public documents. > This is falsifying facts. The court of Phnom Penh DID NOT convicted Sam Rainsy and his followers for displaying map with different border demarkation. They were convicted for what they actually did by removing the demarkation. They were not convicted for what they believed. What they believe MAY BE fact. Yet, Sam Rainsy and his follwers have not been able to prove that fact. > The judges agreed, and handed down the prison term and a $16,000 fine. They > also issued an arrest warrant for Sam Rainsy, who lives in exile in France. > And ? > The opposition leader had no chance for a fair trial, says his party's > spokesman Yim Sovann, because the courts answer to the ruling party. > What is a fair trial? Did they or did they not pulled the border demarkation? They were convicted on that. They were not convicted on what they believe. > "Based on the verdict, not only one verdict, but the previous one, to my > understanding and to the understanding of the people of Cambodia and the > international community, this court is not independent," he said. "This court > is used as a political tool to muzzle the opposition party." > The court may not be independent. However, Sam Rainsy's case is no braner. Any court on earth could prove that. Remember! the accusation is created by government. And the court is to decide whether that accusation is true or not. In Sam Rainsy's case, the court proved that he and his followers really removed that border demarkation. They were convicted. They were not convicted on what they believe. > The dispute dates back a year when Sam Rainsy and two villagers removed > wooden posts marking the border between Cambodia and Vietnam. He received a > two-year jail term for that and the villagers were each jailed for a year. > Now you are talking. > The two nations are in the middle of a six-year exercise to map their > 1,270-kilometer border. Sam Rainsy has said Cambodia is losing land to > Vietnam in the process. > Why didn't he prove it instead of doing silly acts to convict himself in an unstable court of Cambodia? > The issue is a sensitive one for the government. Prime Minister Hun Sen > maintains close relations with Vietnam, although many Cambodians are > distrustful of their neighbor. In addition, Cambodia is involved in a tense > border dispute with Thailand, which at times has turned violent. > Borth border demarkation are disputed by some people including Sam Rainsy. That's not what he was convicted on. > Spokesman Yim Sovann says the government is growing less tolerant because it > fears the opposition as the country heads toward the 2013 general election. > He calls Thursday's verdict a "step backward for democracy" and he is calling > for international help to prevent what he terms a slide toward > authoritarianism. > Opposition party is a party to oppose everything of their current government of all cost. Opposition party is using democracy to back their causes. It is not the opposition party alone who promotes democracy in Cambodia. it must be the people of Cambodia themselves to make it poosible. Today, Cambodian democracy is not there yet due to many reasons. However, it is not prooden to say that the opposition party is the party of democracy is false. This is my opinion only. If Sam Rainsy really represents democracy in Cambodia, he does not embrace a policy of " I am the only right party. Others are wrong." position. > "The international community has spent a lot of money to build democracy in > Cambodia, to promote human rights, to help to build the rule of law," says > Yim Sovann. "So if the leader of the biggest opposition party is in exile or > facing jail term of more than 10 years, we can not say that Cambodia is > democratic." > The international community has spent alot of money to promote democracy in Cambodia. They brought Cambodia to where it is today. It may not be the position that you some others would like to see. However, the democracy in Cambodia has been moved forward. My friend, You may be right that democracy in Cambodia could have been somewhere else. However, that "could have been" is just a dream. It doesn't mean that there is no democracy in Cambodia. You just disagree that the improvement could have been far ahead of where it is today. Sam Rainsy and his followers are trying to make the people of Cambodia believe that there is no democracy in Cambodia. That's why they can go no where. Their leaders leaders are desperate to find ways to fight. They have been doing silly things to destroy themselves. Mu and Sam Rainsy acts are prime example. > Mr. Hun Sen's government has long been accused of using lawsuits to silence > critics. This month, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in > Cambodia, Surya Subedi, issued a report saying the courts are corrupt and > often beholden to the ruling party. Among other things, he recommended that > public figures become more tolerant of criticism and stop using the courts > against their critics. It may be true that Hun Sen government is that way. However, it doesn't mean that the acts of Mu and Sam Rainsy are right either. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cambodia Discussion (CAMDISC) - www.cambodia.org" group. This is an unmoderated forum. Please refrain from using foul language. Thank you for your understanding. Peace among us and in Cambodia. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/camdisc Learn more - http://www.cambodia.org
