koffee
Promoting Human Rights Values to Reduce Corruption in Cambodia
Written by: Yatt Malai, A 3rd-year student majoring in International Relations at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia Edited by: Dr. Heng Kimkong, Co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Cambodian Education Forum and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Cambodia Development Center (Photo Credit: "Cambodia-0823" by Rock Portrait Photography is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.) Cambodia is a democratic country providing freedom, although limited in some cases, to people to speak out in order to influence anything that happens in society. Everyone loves to live in a peaceful country, and they are happy to do what they love. For those who are nationalist, they would be over caring about how the government leads the country to be better, balanced, or respectful of human rights. In the real world, when people face many problems, they tend to commit corruption because it is a way to help them get what they need. According to a report by Transparency International, there is rampant corruption in Cambodia. For example, Cambodia was ranked 162 of 180 countries in the world in 2021. Corruption is the action of wanting something by breaking the law, it affects respect, destroys democracy, impedes economic growth, and makes inequality, poverty, social division, and the environmental problem worse. People are the victims of corruption, so their voices should be heard. Corruption and human rights violations are major problems in Cambodia Corruption happens in many fields in Cambodia such as education, politics, social media, environment, industry and so on. Due to corruption, there are many incidents of human rights violations. For example, during the demonstration of employees who are disputing their work with the NagaWorld company, some employees were arrested. In addition, corruption happens day by day, and some people care only about their benefits by ignoring other people as the victim. Family connections in public institutions and at office are thought to be a serious issue that encourages corruption. Yet recently, the Minister of Interior has demonstrated commitment to educate corrupt officials to improve what a national police reform framework is. However, it seems quiet even the government officials already know that people will criticize those plans because there are still opportunities for corruption among officials in important jobs and positions, usually in favor of the commission's actions. The chance for corruption in state institutions and ministries is considerable; officials still have significant power and responsibility and can abuse their position for their own advantage. The availability, effectiveness, and accessibility of products and services connected to human rights can be severely harmed by corruption. Also, it compromises the integrity and efficacy of the system of governance, the rule of law, and ultimately the country itself. One of the most worrying trends in recent years is the significant rise in land disputes, which has serious implications for human rights in Cambodia where the increasing population depends on the land for survival. Numerous reported incidences of land grabbing were started by soldiers, police officers, or members of the local government. Fair compensation is all too rarely taken into account when evictions are caused by threats, intimidation, or even violence. Additionally, Cambodia often engages in extrajudicial executions, primarily when police shoot demonstrators during land protests. Respecting human rights helps society to combat corruption We could now see that more people in Cambodia are confident to spread information than before. For example, they know about the issue of corruption such as the case of deforestation at Tamao Mountain. Respect for human rights could be the most powerful element because it empowers people and tells them how they deserve dignity from society, whether it is the government or their work environment especially when they do not receive it, they can stand up, and human rights is not required by legal practice nor accepted as such. Instead, corruption has an impact on the international human rights that have been covenanted. Furthermore, social rights are most affected especially by petty corruption. For example, corruption in the health sector affects the right of everyone to the highest attainable standard of health. Generally, a human rights approach can draw attention to the rights of those who are affected by corruption, such as the rights to free primary education and access to safe drinking water. It also demonstrates how the misapplication of public funds in those areas prevents them from enjoying the benefits to which they are legally entitled. Finally, now that we live in a peaceful country, we do not want to see any negative actions including human right violations or corruption, so let us start to reduce those kinds of problems from ourselves first, make our mind clean and moral, and especially know the role of a good citizen. In this situation, human rights play a vital role in dealing with corruption. Thus, we should have a clean mindset, be moral, and importantly find the key sources why they do what they are facing. Moreover, we should try to promote law enforcement as it is helpful for the promotion of accountability and prevention of crimes, which in turn promotes the rule of law and public safety. * This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.
Politik
Cambodia’s Foreign Policy in the Regional Politics
Written by: Phengly Sopha, 4-year student majoring in International Relations at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia and Research Intern at Cambodia Development Center Edited by: Dr. Heng Kimkong, Co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Cambodian Education Forum and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Cambodia Development Center (Photo Credit: This photo was posted on the Facebook page of Prime Minister Hun Sen on February 5, 2021) Following the creation of the Kingdom of Cambodia after the long and chronic civil war, including the Khmer rouge regime, Cambodia opened up, becoming a full member of the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) on 30 April 1999. It then implemented its own “open door strategy” to welcome and integrate its economic liberalization, regionally and globally. Unfortunately, Cambodia has faced many challenges, particularly regarding its regional choices that are often criticized by countries in the region and the world. For example, Cambodia was harshly criticized when it was an ASEAN chair in 2012. The former Cambodia Foreign Minister, Hor Namhong, told his colleagues that “the ASEAN meeting is not a court” and requested the joint communique to not mention the maritime disputes. Moving forward, Cambodia must craft its foreign policy approaches by maintaining its neutral foreign policy and employing public diplomacy, preventive diplomacy, and hedging strategy. Firstly, Cambodia's foreign policy of neutrality was declared by the late King Norodom Sihanouk during his reign from 1950 to 1970, commonly known as the “Sangkum Reastr Niyum”. After the national election, monitored by United National Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) in 1993, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia promulgated the “neutrality policy” in Article 53. This means non-alignment with foreign countries, except for the UN peacebuilding operation, and an acceptance of all militarized support for self-defense. Therefore, it is vital for Cambodia to maintain its neutral policy to expand its international network and promote national interests. Many countries have recently criticized Cambodia for being pro-China and urged the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) to be neutral and independent. In response, the RGC often states that it never abandons any foreign friends, always welcomes all states to join military exercises, and opens doors for every country willing to collaborate in all sectors, including social, economic, and political sectors. For instance, Cambodia allowed the U.S. military personnel to visit Ream Naval Base, following the accusation that Cambodia allowed China to use the base for military purposes. Secondly, public diplomacy can help Cambodia to promote its reputation on the regional and international stage. In international relations, “public diplomacy” is a tool used by states to influence other states. In broader terms, it is an instrumentalization for states to gain their soft power and enhance their attraction and reputation abroad. In other words, public diplomacy is the strategy for states to gather all relevant stakeholders and institutions to publicly discuss any issue with mutual respect and in a peaceful manner. For instance, the 13 Asia-EU Meeting (ASEM) in 2020, under the theme; “Strengthening the Multilateralism for Shared Growth” reflected Cambodia’s public diplomacy strategy to gather all ASEM members virtually at the meeting with fruitful discussions and essential outcomes for mutual interests. Thirdly, being blamed and criticized by some countries, especially by great powers such as the United States, Cambodia somehow lost its face on the international stage. In between great powers, Cambodia plays a crucial role in maintaining peace, security, and stability in the region as well as promoting the international role-based order. In light of this, Cambodia must have strong leadership and adhere to “preventive diplomacy” (measures that a state used to prevent any conflict escalation) to build trust and mutual understanding between the great powers and other regional member states. The ASEAN Regional Forum and the ASEAM Foreign Ministerial Meeting hosted physically by Cambodia have marked the great success of using preventive diplomacy unlike what happened during Cambodia’s ASEAN Chairmanship in 2012. Finally, while public and preventive diplomacy is the key to successfully negotiating and reducing tensions between great powers in the region, a “hedging strategy” which is the strategy that a state uses to avoid direct confrontation with another big state in international relations and in a mixed cooperative manner is used. In this sense, Cambodia needs to have a flexible strategy to balance the gains and losses from great power competition. In the meantime, Cambodia can escape any persecution and sanctions imposed by other states. For instance, the RCG always mentions that Cambodia leaves doors open for all nations, and investors can come to run businesses freely as long as they respect the investment law and other Cambodian laws. At the same time, Cambodia's foreign policy is favorable to China to secure its national security and interests, including additional economic agreements such as the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). To this end, Cambodia more or less will receive criticism from great powers and other counties in terms of its choices to engage closely with China. It is sometimes problematic for Cambodia to achieve its regional interests. Therefore, adhering to the principle of neutrality as its core value of the foreign policy is the best solution to deal with regional challenges. As a small state, Cambodia cannot stay alone without any cooperation, engagement, and competition with others. Thus, a freely open-door strategy to welcome all states is a must for maximizing Cambodia’s social, economic, and political interests. * This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.
Event
Huawei's Investment in Cambodia
Gallery
Politikoffee Weekly Forums
Since it was founded in 2011, Politikoffee has conducted nearly 250 weekly forums. We have had variety of guest speakers ranging from prominent activists, government officials, foreign diplomats, and ambassadors, NGOs/think tank leaders, researchers, and experts. Politikoffee aims at cultivating Democratic Political Culture in Cambodia through raising socio-political awareness and promoting the culture of discussion, debate, and challenge among youths, based on principles of national interest, open-mindedness, and fraternity.
Politik
Cambodia Needs a New Political Culture. So, What Should It Be?
Written by: Han Noy, a 2rd-year student majoring in International Relations at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia. Edited by: Sao Phal Niseiy, Editor-in-Chief at The Cambodianess and Deputy Editor-in-Chief at Thmey Thmey News Photo Credit: Happystock/Fotolia Cambodia used to be one of the greatest empires in Asia during its peak from the 11th to 13th century. Its territory roughly covered most of the mainland Southeast Asia countries, including now parts of Vietnam, Thailand and Laos. However, this glorious history did not last long. The power of the Khmer Empire swiftly declined by the 14th century, subsequently leading to endless suffering and the deprivation of sovereignty, territory, and independence since then. Based on our historical records, following the fall of the Angkorean era, the country suffered prolonged civil wars and persistent power struggles among our political elites. More importantly, after regaining the independence from France in 1953, our people highly anticipated that the nation would have lastly lived in harmony, prosperity and peace under the reign of the late King Father Norodom Sihanouk. It, however, was just a good dream and hope as the coup staged to depose the prince from power in 1970, led by General Lon Nol and Prince Sisowath Siri Matak, drove Cambodia into the Vietnam War. Five years after the coup, Cambodians ended up witnessing the rise to power of the genocidal Khmer Rouge regime, during which there was widespread starvation and ruthless persecution of almost two million innocent Cambodians. After that, Cambodia could not even realize the perpetual peace as war among different political factions persisted along the Thai border until 1997 when there was a national reconciliation and integration. Currently, Cambodia has finally attained what we call a negative peace—a condition at which war is absent. However, its political landscape remains very tense, conflictual, and polarized. Therefore, this part brought up a question for Cambodians, should the country seek to adopt a new political culture? I raised this question because the current political culture now is ineffective and obsolete, failing to function and respond to the needs of the public amid the fast-changing world. Therefore, I am writing this article to explain why it is requisite for the country to embrace a new political culture. What is political culture? The term ‘political culture’ commonly refers to the beliefs and views of people of the country toward the political system. It generally consists of political ideals and operating norms of a political apparatus in a country. So, psychological and subjective dimensions of politics are what political culture is about, and political culture can be shaped by both the collective history of a political system and its members. Jürgen R. Winkler (2020) argues that political culture is ‘the shared views and normative judgments’ of people on the political system. He also highlighted that the notion of political culture is not about discussing how people think of political actors such as a president and prime minister, but it mainly focuses on how they contemplate the political system and its legitimacy. Meanwhile, American political scientist Lucian Pye considers that political culture encompasses fundamental values, feelings and knowledge that guide the political process. On the other hand, the study of political culture has also been circulated widely since the establishment of Western democracy. The first classic study of political culture is on ‘The Civic Culture’(1963) by Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verba, both of whom are American political scientists. Almond and Verba explicitly categorized political culture into three pure types such as parochial, subject and participant. In a parochial political culture, people are not allowed to do anything, and they know only about the existence of a central government. Regarding the subject of political culture, citizens are aware of themselves not just as participants but also as a subject of the government. Meanwhile, in the participant political culture, people hold the belief that there is an interconnection between them and the system in which the system can impact them while they also can contribute to it. In a nutshell, political culture is mainly about the beliefs, opinions and feelings--all of which can shape the political process of a country. Moreover, it also manifests why and how leaders and policymakers behave toward any issues facing them. Proposed new political culture for contemporary Cambodia Despite our country suffering much in its dark history, we continue to go through a lot of struggles due to the political culture our politicians have chosen to take on. In an exclusive interview with Khmer Times, Preap Kol, former executive director of Transparency International Cambodia, pointed out that our current political culture is risky and could lead to national disunity as it involves making baseless accusations, which he labeled as “coloring culture.” I concur with what he raised. Also, I recognize that our country is surely in much need of a new political culture. So, in the next part, I am offering some perspectives of the new version of political culture, which I believe fits our current national context. First, the cultural dialogue needs to be fully espoused by our political elites as it is very essential in contributing to national development. It is because it allows all parties to put national interests and survival before their interests. Besides, the culture of dialogue helps strengthen the cooperation and promotes national unity among Cambodian citizens in general and political elites in particular. For instance, Cambodian politicians chose to embrace the political dialogue in 2015 following the years-long political deadlock resulting from the controversial election in 2013. During that time, the political atmosphere appeared to be hassle-free. And more importantly, many members of the opposition party were freed from jail. Therefore, we will be able to end and prevent any conflicts and distrust among ourselves by fully adopting the culture of dialogue. It, of course, should be considered as the best option for our new political culture. Second, our country should also seek to build a culture of inclusive political institutions. A nation collapsing or thriving mainly depends on the strength of political institutions. When a country allows the client politics and patronage system to take root, rampant corruption, injustice and struggle for power will continue to subsist, leading to poor governance. Any modern governing system should be constructed on a merit-based system that is full of competent technocrats, not based on political connections. Furthermore, clientelism will only undermine good democratic practice. It happens since some democratic components such as accountability and transparency will be hindered, while powerful and wealthy people will just use their wealth to buy ballots as they seek to protect their interests while ignoring the interests of the public. Hence, building and fostering the culture of inclusive political institutions are significant for the country's success. As Acemoglu and Robinson single out in their book titled “Why Nations Fail”, the key determinant of why some nations are rich and others are poor is the selection of two types of political institutions, namely inclusive and extractive institutions. Therefore, the institutions we choose will determine the future of our nation. In conclusion, political culture is indeed our views, beliefs and perceptions towards our political system. More importantly, it also shapes our political behavior because it maps out how people should interact with the government and involve themselves with political affairs. In the Cambodian context, our political culture is already obsolete, meaning we need to create a new framework of political culture that can guarantee a better future for our nation. As I already suggested earlier, instigating cultural dialogue and erecting inclusive political institutions will be the key to our well-off national development. However, to make it a reality, all stakeholders should work together to promote the new concept of political culture through mobilizing different approaches. I believe that this new political culture could be made known to the public through education programs, public events and the commemoration of historical events. Once these efforts are made, the spirit of our new political culture will be ultimately attained.
The Promised Land of Democracy: Cambodia’s Need to Realise Free and Fair Elections
Written by: Chea Sameang, a graduate with a Bachelor's degree in International Relations from Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia Photo Credit: Jerry Redfern On March 1, 2020, Prime Minister Hun Sen announced that Cambodia will hold commune elections on June 5, 2022, and that the general election shall be held in July 2023, under the theme of “free and fair” - and in monsoon season humidity. In theory, it might be a “free and fair” election for multi-party democracy, with nearly 50 parties competing with the long-ruling party CPP in the commune election. But in reality, it might be a bridge too far, with competitors unlikely to even touch the CPP’s tail. However, we can never be too sure of what will happen in Cambodia’s next election in 2023. Do citizens care to invest in democracy and vote, after the pandemic shot out their daily bread and the staunchly right-wing party was kicked to the ground, setting like a sunset in 2017? With this op-ed, I am not going to provide readers with foresight or prediction on the Cambodian election in 2023, as I know well that Cambodian youth and political observers already understand what is going to happen in the next election. Who is going to win all the seats? And, who is going to rule the country? Prime Minister Hun Sen already claimed at the Peace Palace on August 1, 2021, that he would stay in power until he “no longer wants to do it anymore.” Instead, with this op-ed, I am simply going to walk readers through my explanation of why free and fair elections could be the solution to improve Cambodia's democracy in the future. Signs of Decay After the Crackdown After the crackdown on the outlawed CNRP from the political boxing ring in 2017, the CPP won all the power, with nearly 90% of the ballots, and then eliminated almost all that remained of the CNRP - members, supporters, and activists - with threats, intimidation, and prison terms. The alleged conspiracy, incitement to commit a felony, and social unrest become the most powerful tools to freeze those former CNRP activists and members, linking them to the so-called “Color Revolution” to overthrow the Cambodian government. Nonetheless, many NGOs urged the Cambodian government to release the imprisoned opposition members, and establish a neutral political landscape for minor parties to participate, and show voters that the Cambodian government is not a violator of human rights. However, the outcome was quite the opposite, with the Cambodian government showing no intention to take such action while ignoring the criticisms. From this brief alert, we can see that the future of democracy in Cambodia has been debilitated, making its shadow fragile and uncertain. The issue was deepened by the crackdown of independent media organizations, inducing the Cambodia Daily to be hit with a multi-million-dollar tax and forced to shut down. According to Lee Morgenbesser, an Australian political analyst who has written multiple journal articles about Cambodia’s political situation, Cambodia is heading towards “Hegemonic Authoritarianism”. Elliot Brennan of the Lowy Institute warned that “If Cambodia democracy is allowed to fall without a whimper from the West, the contagion of despotism will be hard to contain in Southeast Asia.” On the other side, NEC spokesman Dim Sovannarom told the Khmer Times on August 3, 2021, that “We are working based on the law and we are balanced, not like others say.” Thus, to the question of whether Cambodia's election is going to be free and fair, the answer lay in the eyes of Cambodian youths and political observers. As a political analyst, Em Sovannara told VOD News: “their participation in the 2022 and 2023 elections is just to beautify the garden of democracy.” However, without true intention from the government to improve the landscape and image of Cambodia’s democracy by allowing those minor parties to realistically challenge the rule of the 70-year-old Cambodian People’s Party (CPP), which retains control of the armed forces, the competition will be little more than just a game, like riding a horse without holding the reins. Why does Free and Fair Matter? Yet, while Cambodia’s democracy, inherited to obey and practice since 1993, continues to decay, the end of the CNRP party is not the end of Cambodia’s democracy. Despite nearly four decades of political change, the process of free and fair elections seems to be in reverse. However, if both the government and other minor parties are willing to play the game only as a show to the Cambodian people, then I believe that the hope for free and fair elections will remain at a standstill. In the game of elections, both actors should play the cards of “free and fair,” demonstrating to the audience that they can be satisfied with ideas of the “win-lose” theory. However, in the Cambodian game of elections, where the minor players are just newly registered entrants to the political system with no power in hand, they will have no sword to fight with CPP. Cambodian People’s Party spokesman Sok Eysan himself told local news that the CPP welcomes the participation of all political parties in the upcoming elections, but that the minor parties “could not be compared to the CPP.” Cambodia’s government always claims to uphold democracy and, thus, free and fair is essential to that democracy. Moreover, to ensure that individual electoral rights can be exercised effectively, and to ensure the commissions are not dominated by pro-government representatives, freedom and fairness must be promoted and implemented. Thus, to ensure and promote a free and fair election for Cambodia’s future democracy for the next generations, there are three steps that must be taken. First, the Cambodian government should staff the National Election Commission (NEC) independently in order to avoid rumors of internal bias. After the NEC was nominated by the ruling party CPP, many criticisms were aired: that it’s not neutral or independent and remains under the influence of the ruling party. Simply put, to uphold the integrity of the NEC as the mandated actor to organize, oversee, and monitor all aspects of the elections from registration of voters and parties to ultimately verifying the accuracy of the final results, the election body must not be undermined by a real or perceived bias towards the CPP government. Second, the Cambodian Government must respect the basic principles of human rights and fix its own problems by not weaponizing the criminal code to target the opposite party’s supporters and other human rights activists. The government should give amnesty and allow them to engage with the freedom to establish political associations and participate with any party they choose. To continue to target and threaten them will only act as a threat to the next youth generation and a deterrent to participating in the political landscape. Since the Cambodian government always speaks of upholding democratic principles and respecting human rights, free and fair elections must be demonstrated to the public. Third, small parties should merge together into one or two parties, as the Human Rights Party (HRP) and SRP (Sam Rainsy Party) did to confront the CPP in 2018 after both parties had endured fewer votes from supporters in 2013. Being a new and small party attempting to compete with the long-ruling CPP, does not arouse much interest in voters. Without a strong string, a kite will easily be cut free. Simply put, people aren't interested in supporting small parties, but they might choose one big party that can oppose the strong one. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed some major shortcomings in both Cambodia’s political and health care systems. The resulting economic insecurity and inequality - in which the rich get richer, the poor get poorer - makes it hard to maneuver free and fair elections in Cambodia. Moreover, since there is no party that could even touch the tail of the CCP and no neutral national institutions to organize and oversee the elections, the 2023 general election would just be little more than a show, leaving the political landscape in a state of limbo and turmoil. However, if the government and existing minor parties genuinely seek to improve the situation, then anything is possible. Together, they can compete in solidarity and stop criticizing each other, carrying out their jobs to benefit the Cambodian people, as is their responsibility, rather than serving their own interests. Cambodia's democracy may be at a crucial turning point - free and fair elections are possible and the next generation would be proud to follow their legacy.
Opinion: Paris Peace Accord Should Move Past Controversy After 30 Years
Written by: Han Noy, a 2rd-year student majoring in International Relations at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia. Edited by: Sao Phal Niseiy, Editor-in-Chief at The Cambodianess and Deputy Editor-in-Chief at Thmey Thmey News Photo Credit: (AFP PHOTO/ERIC FEFERBERG) October 2021 marks 30 years since the signing of the Paris Peace Agreement, the first multilateral peace deal accomplished following the end of the Cold War. The agreement aimed at ending the decade-long civil war in Cambodia, paving the way for the United Nations to administer the country temporarily through a peacekeeping mission to disarm the conflicting parties and ensure the repatriation of the refugees. In addition, it also provided a legal foundation for the country to organize a free and fair election while enabling it to move toward multi-party democracy, in which those in power are held accountable for upholding and defending human rights. Thanks to the 1991 Paris Agreement, Cambodia remains at peace with stability and harmony, and with these, it can achieve rapid development. However, even on its 30th birthday, the view toward the agreement has continued to be controversial among politicians and civil society groups. The government side has always claimed that the agreements were irrelevant as the major points of it had been incorporated into the constitution. As seen, the government even removed Paris Peace Agreement Day from the list of the public holidays. On the other hand, the opposition parties and civil society groups generally argue that it has been still binding upon all signatories including the Kingdom itself as it has not informed all stakeholders of its official decision to annul the agreement. As a young Cambodian, who was born years after the creation of this agreement, I am disappointed to witness that contemporary Cambodia continues to suffer from endless disagreement and misunderstanding of the 1991 agreement, which, of course, lead to more tensions, discrepancies, and even conflicts among people with different political tendencies. I think what people should understand here is that the contested historical narrative does not serve the purpose of national development, prosperity, and peace. Instead, by not walking away from this obsolete narrative and myth, what we will achieve is only creating a more polarized and divisive society because we choose conflict over solidarity, tensions over co-existence, and isolation over cooperation. It demonstrates that whether to claim this agreement is dead or not, will lead to nowhere. Therefore, our political leaders and other stakeholders should learn to move beyond this never-ending disagreement. To me, we all must accept the fact that the agreement provided our country with political settlement to end over two decades of armed conflicts. It, more importantly, allowed us to bring forward national reconciliation as well as pursue liberal democracy and human rights. Without this historic event, our country would not have been in harmony as it is right now. In addition, I also want to accentuate that the Paris Peace Agreement Day should once again be commemorated and remembered. It also should be regarded as the day that Cambodia got out of the political quagmire, and intimately found the way to perpetual peace. By saying this, I believe it is more than possible that each of us can live up to the spirit of both the 1991 Paris Agreement and the 1993 Constitution as they are the founding documents of modern Cambodia. But speaking of the acknowledgment, what I think remains a challenge is whether all political elites, especially those in the ruling party are willing to respect and put into practice the principles stipulated in the Paris Agreement and the Constitution or not. Moreover, the spirit of honoring the extraordinary day should be cherished, not undermined. It means all Cambodians should be free to commemorate the day without any disturbance or prevention and any efforts to politicize this event should be ended. More importantly, this historic day should be the day on which our political elites reflect on whether they have already done enough to comply with these documents fully. If they have not, they have both legal and moral obligations to push themself harder to adjust and correct their course of actions. It can manifest their genuine conscience and intention to place national interests at the heart of their positions while trying to avoid the pursuit of their vengeance and political ambition. In the meantime, I still see the importance of them reinventing their traditional political culture as the current one is already old-fashioned and doesn’t serve the benefits of the people. As we all could see, "instead of working for a better future for Cambodians, politicians of both sides spend their time insulting, mocking, insinuating, accusing, framing, and labeling one another almost for the sake of provocation alone.” Unfortunately, this sort of political culture does not either safeguard or drive development and prosperity, but only leads to destruction, polarization, and reduction. If we continue to be split by different political narratives of the same event, our dream of transforming and achieving inclusive and sustainable growth will just be at stake. For our compatriots, we all also have a responsibility to uphold the principle of unity and keep in mind that “unity is strength while division is weakness.” History has already revealed that the divisions among us only resulted in power decline and territorial losses. As we could see these appalling consequences, why can't we just find a way to work together to make our country strong again? Our politicians can do a lot more by dedicating their time and effort to finding solutions to address pressing social challenges, such as rampant corruption, land grabbing, human rights violations as well as environmental degradation, and illegal immigration? All in all, the spirit of the Paris Agreement should be revived and commemorated, and the documents are still relevant and significant for modern Cambodia. The multiple elucidations perceived by politicians regarding the Paris Peace Accord Day should not continue to be the source of hostilities, political confrontation, and tension within Cambodian society. It rather should be the day that we have “another chance to live, unite, and work together to achieve the Cambodian dream.” Also, the debate on whether the agreement is invalid or not brings us nowhere. Thus, all stakeholders need to rethink and seek common ground to address socio-economic issues facing contemporary Cambodia. We should not let the past haunt our future; we need to take our past lessons thoughtfully and seek constructive and innovative means to map out and plan for the future. The fate of our country indeed lies in the hands of all Cambodian citizens; it is, therefore, high time for us to be committed to building true national unity, supporting each other, and working together to make Cambodia great again. Politikoffee accepts no responsibility for facts presented and views expressed. Responsibility rests solely with theindividual authors.
What should be the proper ways for Cambodian monks to participate in politics?
Written by: Han Noy, a 2rd-year student majoring in International Relations at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia. Edited by: Heng Kimkong, a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at Cambodia Development Center and a Ph.D. Candidate in Education at The University of Queensland, Australia. Monks at Angkor Wat in Siem Reap province, Cambodia. (Eugene Hoshiko / Associated Press) Introduction Buddhism came to Cambodia in the early 5th century when Hindu trading merchants brought it from India to the Mon kingdoms (present-day Myanmar and Thailand). Since then, Buddhism has played a significant role in Cambodian society. As the nation embraces it as the state religion, Cambodian Budhhist monks have been very active in taking part in their country’s social, economical, and political affairs. During the period of the French colonization (1863-1953), Khmer people were living under control, oppression, and sorrow. The liberty and rights were snatched away, and heavy taxes were required, making it virtually unendurable for Cambodian people. Within this context, Buddhist monks played a critical role in Cambodian society. They contributed to the cultivation and promotion of Khmer values and Khmer nationalism. They tried to preserve Khmer culture and bring the country out of danger of cultural extinction. In 1942, after the arrest of Achar Hem Chieu, one of the prominent monks who was leading people against the French colonization, there were between 1000 to 3000 monks, lay people, and the laity who participated in a demonstration, led by monks from all pagodas in Phnom Penh. At the time, about 500 monks carried umbrellas, an event known as an “ Umbrella War”. Our history suggests that Cambodian politics and Buddhist monks have been intertwined with each other for centuries. There are, however, still some critiques and praises from people regarding the involvement of monks in political activities, particularly as regards demonstrations and other forms of public gatherings. Today monks’ political activism has been labeled as improper, resulting in monks being arrested, defrocked and/or accused of violating monks’ code of conduct by the Cambodian authorities. Essentially, these have demotivated many monks from participating in their country’s public affairs, and the role of monks in Cambodian society seems to have faltered. So is it wrong that monks participate in politics or exercise their political activism? What should be the proper ways for monks to participate in politics? Is it wrong for monks to participate in politics? Before knowing whether it is right or wrong when a monk participates in politics, we need to define the term “politics'' first. In a general view, politics is the art of competing for power to lead a state based on our own political vision. It is the goal and ambition of politicians to compete in politics and to govern a country. As Hans Morgenthau, an influential realist, once said, politics is “the struggle for power.” In this regard, it is not a duty of Buddhist monks to engage in politics to gain power to control the state just like what politicians do. In the Cambodian context, when people think of monks in politics, they generally picture monks joining public gatherings or assemblies only; they do not see anything beyond this. Nobody ever stops and thinks whether it is against monks’ discipline or not that Buddhist monks join demonstrations. The answer to this can be yes or no. It is a yes, if monks adhere to good and quiet manners by respecting the value as a monk, while it is a no when monks scream, yell, raise hands, and use any other inappropriate gestures which are considered illicit in monks’ code of conduct. Thus, even though it may not be right for monks to participate in politics, they still can do so as long as they can comply with the monks’ codes of conduct. In fact, monks can take part in politics to show their care about their country's public affairs in a similar way as lay people and other citizens do. In a democractic society, everyone has equal rights to participate in politics. Monks can therefore do so as long as they do not violate monks’ codes of conduct. In fact, the goal of Buddhist monks is enormous; being monkhood is not for gambling, entertaining, avoiding housework, saving wealth, and seeking for ranks, but it is about digging out the truth of life to alleviate all suffering and to ultimately save and free the world from misery. In addition, they have the very significant responsibilities to help their people from any sorrow through preaching Dhamma, and participating in politics when people and country face danger, injustice, and/or instability. If we look at the Dhamma, there is no statement from Buddha which prevents monks from associating with political, social,and economical affairs but only advises them to assist and extricate people out of crisis and hardship. In addition, as stated in Article 31 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia, “ Every Khmer citizen shall be equal before the law, enjoying the same rights, freedom and fulfilling the same obligations regardless of race, color, sex, language, religious belief, political tendency, birth origin, social status, wealth or other status.” Likewise, Article 35 states that “Khmer citizens of either sex shall have the right to participate actively in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the nation.” Based on the Cambodian Constitution, Cambodian citizens have the right to participate in politics for the sake of national development. Thus, in accordance with our country’s Constitution and the Buddhist principles of the middle path, it seems that monks are not prohibited from participating in politics to contribute to the development of their nation. Furthermore, Article 15 of the 1997 Cambodian law on political parties states that “Religious priests, members of judiciary, members of the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces (R.C.A.F) and National Police Forces may join as members of political parties, but they must not conduct any activity for supporting or opposing any political party. A political party must not organize its organizational structure inside the religious bodies, Royal Cambodian Armed Forces and in the National Police Forces.” This means that the law does not exclude anyone, particularly Buddhist monks from society; everyone has an equal opportunity to be members of any political parties, although the law does not allow religious priests to conduct or organize any activities to oppose any sides or parties. In this sense, monks are authorized to be in any political group, but they cannot explicitly proclaim which parties they are in and criticize another side. Buddha once said, “living in a suitable place is the blessing.” Monks will be living in happiness, tranquility, and peace when their country is prosperous, peaceful, stable, and just, but all of these will be taken away, including a chance to chant Dhamma and do meditation, when there is no peace, prosperity, stability, and justice in their country. As we can see, during the Khmer Rouge regime, when the country was in darkness and crisis and people experienced starvation, torture and death, monks suffered and were targeted for execution as well. Achar Hem Chieu used to say that “The monks’ rice pot remains with the people, if the people are miserable, have nothing to eat, so do the monks.” This indicates that when people live under slavery, oppresion, and starvation, monks will also suffer. Hence, they need to find a way to help, guide, and encourage their people to fight for freedom, independence, and total peace. They cannot just eat, stay, and chant Dhamma in pagodas seeing their country going to collapse and people living in misery. They need to do whatever they can to bring their country and people out of despondency and suffering. The proper ways for monks to participate in politics. Buddhist monks have played important roles contributing to national evolution. There are still, however, some bad views regarding monks' engagement in politics. Thus, I wish to offer three possible means for them to take part in politics. First, preaching Dhamma. It is an effective way to spread knowledge, philosophy and Buddhist concepts that are helpful for our people since monks are oftentimes invited to give sermons when Cambodian Buddhists conduct any ceremonies inside and outside of pagodas. Hence, it is a great chance for them to talk about the real Dhamma left by Buddha comprising a lot of good advice which can be applied to build a prosperous country and promote good governance in our country as well. Additionally, they can extend their talk beyond Buddha's theory and speak about Khmer identity, culture, democratic principles, and Cambodian laws because these are very important knowledge that must be cultivated and shared to Cambodian people, especially youth. Buddha spent 45 years after enlightenment to focus on teaching, explaining, and addressing Dhamma to people. His teaching is extremely impactful, not just for ordinary people but also for kings or country leaders. Second, writing and publishing articles and/or books. Writing is an art to disseminate our vision, perspective, and Buddha’s philosophy to the public. It is helpful and influential, especially when our ideas are written down, it is very critical and lasts a long time; it can be passed from one generation to another. For instance, we can take a pattern from monks during the French colonization, the Sangkum Reastr Niyum, and the Khmer Republic; they have done a very good job related to this, and their concepts and opinions continue to exist and have influence on our recent time and in the future. Unfortunately, as not many Cambodian Buddhist monks spend time to write academic papers or books, their perspective, and Buddha's concept have not been promulgated widely to people even though Cambodia people are 95% Buddhist.This is the real problem that must be fixed and keep improving in the field of academic writing. Likewise, according to Yos Hut Khemacaro, head of the Khmer Buddhist Foundation in France, in order for monk’s contribution to be constructive “they require greater education on the teachings of Buddhism as well as a more sophisticated awareness of the world outside the monastery. Only then can they effectively instruct and provide guidance to the people'' and contribute to social progress .This can be a good way for them to indirectly play a role in politics without violating monks’ code of conduct. Third, participating in politics by adhering to non-violence and the middle path. As Cambodian monks participate in political activities to challenge injustice, human rights violations, and rampant corruption are mostly seen as partisans by the authorities, it is crucial that monks be strategic and follow the middle path. Perhaps non-partisan activism is the way forward. Monks need to ensure that their activism does not appear to be linked to any party or political ideology. Importantly, monks need to help promote peace and the principles of the middle path. For example, there was a Dhammaryietra peace march in 1992 guided by Venerable Maha Ghosananda to bring the message of hope and motivation to all Cambodian people after decades of civil war. This massive peace demonstration was well received by the public and even the government officials. This event proves to us that through the power of universal values of compassion, non-violence, and solidarity, monks can play a crucial role in promoting peace and harmony in society. Conclusion Cambodian monks do distribute significantly to Cambodia's social, political, cultural, and economic development. Therefore, monks’ roles in society and in politics should be supported, not undermined. Moreover, the government and concerned stakeholders need to empower, support, and cooperate with monks; All stakeholders must ensure that there is no excuse to prevent monks from participating in politics since sometimes it is not about monks violating their code of conduct but rather about fear of monks mobilizing political dissent. Allowing Buddhist monks to enjoy civil rights and decide on matters of general concern would be greatly essential for the country's development. Limiting their rights and roles to only religious affairs and preventing them from public affairs are not a smart choice since monks’ roles go beyond what happens in pagodas. They can also contribute to ensuring that the government implements its policies effectively. However, Buddhist monks themselves must be aware of who they really are. Their participation and contribution need to be balanced between religious virtue and the country's laws. Monks can be part of the solution, not the problem! When everyone can play their part in contributing to national development, our country would be more prosperous, democratic, and civilized.
Koffee
Cambodia’s Hidden Killer: The Tragedy of Road Traffic Accidents
Written by: Chhnoeum Satyareach, A 4th-year student majoring in International Economics at the Royal University of Phnom Penh Edited by: Dr. Heng Kimkong, Co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Cambodian Education Forum and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Cambodia Development Center (Photo Credit: "Phnom Penh, Cambodia Traffic" by stewickie is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.) Introduction “In a matter of seconds, lives can be irreversibly altered.” This phrase portrays the terrifying and unexpected consequences of road accidents. Road accidents have negatively affected the lives of countless people. The thoughts of losing loved ones and everything in mere seconds have devastated many individuals. In Cambodia, road accidents are not an unfamiliar phenomenon. In fact, it is one of the major causes of death in the country. Over the past 11 years, from 2009-2019, the number of deaths resulting from traffic accidents has increased by 25 percent, which was more than the 17 percent growth in population during that time. A report by the National Road Safety Committee (NRSC) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) revealed an estimated 2,000 deaths and 3,700 injuries resulting from road accidents in 2019. There are 5.4 people dying per day on average. Therefore, understanding the causes and impacts of road traffic accidents is vital in tackling the issue as well as preventing more agony. This article aims to highlight factors that contribute to traffic accidents and its severe consequences. At the same time, the government’s past actions and implemented policies will also be discussed to assess what has been done and what can be improved. Causes Although there are many underlying causes of road traffic accidents, one of the main factors is associated with road user behavior. This is because human errors contributed to about 98 percent of crashes, 16 percent of which were fatalities. It usually involves the consumption of alcohol, speeding, ignoring traffic rules, and other law-violating activities. Speeding accounts for 34 percent of all cases while disregarding others’ driving rights made up 16 percent, and 4 percent from drunk driving. Other noticeable catalysts are the use of drugs and the use of mobile phones while driving, which also contribute to road traffic accidents. A survey by UNDP in 2021 showed that motorbike riders accounted for three-fourths of all deaths, followed by pedestrians, drivers of family cars, and operators of freight vehicles. Motorcycles accounted for more than 80% of all registered vehicles involved in traffic incidents. The majority of deaths happened in the capital and on public roadways. All of these factors reflect one of the Kingdom's major shortcomings, which is the weak traffic law enforcement. The law implementation in Cambodia is still limited and therefore much work remains to be done. Impacts The primary impact of road traffic accidents is the casualties - the injuries and loss of precious lives. According to Interior Minister Sar Kheng, there were a total of 2,670 accidents in 2021, of which 1,497 deaths were reported. Road traffic accidents affected not only individuals but also their loved ones and other people. As stated by Heng Sophannarith, the Deputy Director General of the National Social Security Fund, “Road accidents are hidden killers that cause tragedy and impact families, the economy, and society as a whole”. On top of that, road traffic accidents also create an economic burden. In 2019, UNDP and NRSC estimated that road traffic accidents had cost Cambodia around USD 466.8 million, accounting for 1.7 percent of the national annual Gross Domestic Product. Among the total cost, about 88.8 percent comes from the loss of life. There is also a loss of lifetime incomes. Implemented Measures Several efforts have been made by the Cambodian government to address the increasing number of traffic accidents. This can be seen in the establishment of the National Road Safety Committee (NRSC). NRSC is financially backed by the national budget while its road safety strategy is partially funded. Its core duties comprise coordination, legislation, monitoring, and evaluation of matters related to road safety strategies. There was also a fatal road safety target from 2011 to 2020, aiming to lower fatalities by 50 percent. Moreover, the Cambodian government has invested its resources in law dissemination to raise awareness and promote good practices. Road safety information is disseminated to concerned actors, including factories, enterprises, truck drivers, tuk-tuks, motorcycles, bicycles, and pedestrians to take precautions such as putting on seat belts, wearing helmets, and practicing proper guidelines and regulations. Furthermore, vertical deflections have been installed to encourage drivers to slow down and reduce crashes. These include speed bumps, humps, cushions, tables, raised pedestrian crossings, variation in ride surface, and so on. Recommendations The Cambodian government should continue to promote and strengthen traffic rules and regulations to mitigate the impacts of road accidents. This can be achieved through aggressive information dissemination, including distributing and publicizing key safety rules and standards across various social platforms. The government should also install surveillance cameras to track down and punish law offenders as well as closely monitor the law enforcers to prevent corruption and ensure proper enforcement of the protocols. Strong management in various aspects of road safety is essential to ensure a favorable traffic environment. In addition, adequate responses and contributions from relevant stakeholders besides the government are needed to address these challenges. Educational institutions also play crucial roles in educating and instilling moral sense in individuals, especially the young ones. To that end, educational institutions should add traffic rules to the school curriculum and organize various educational programs and events. As for the individuals, they can contribute through strict compliance with key safety rules and standards, as well as being mindful of others' rights on the road. * This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.
How Should Cambodia Respond to the Pressure from the West?
Written by: Vong Promnea, A Fresh Graduate with a Bachelor’s Degree in International Relations from the Royal University of Phnom Penh Edited by: Dr. Heng Kimkong, Co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Cambodian Education Forum and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Cambodia Development Center (Photo Credit: Facebook Page of Samdech Hun Sen, Cambodia Prime Minister) Background Until now, Cambodia has experienced pressure from Western countries for more than two years already regarding its latest development of human rights. Western countries have been using trade and economic sanctions as a means to require Cambodia to improve human rights. Two of the sanctions are the withdrawal of the Everything But Arms (EBA) of the European Union (EU) and the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) of the United States (US). Although they share similar aims to promote liberal democracy, these two tools are completely different in terms of their origins. Since 2001, the EBA, one of the three branches of the Generalized System of Preference (GSP) of the EU, has been applied to the least developed countries (LDCs) to allow them access to the full duty-free and quota-free EU market for all products except weapons and armaments. Cambodia, as one of the LDCs, has gained substantial benefits from the EBA scheme for its economic development since 2003. Unfortunately, on 12 August 2020, the partial and temporary withdrawal of EBA from Cambodia became effective. This decision was triggered by “serious and systematic violations” of the core human rights in Cambodia including rights to political participation, freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly, land rights, and labor rights. The GSP of the US, on the other hand, expired on 31 December 2020. As of now, it has yet to be renewed by the US Congress and inevitably impacts Cambodia’s exports to the US as it is now subject to “most favored nation” status tariffs. In other words, Cambodia can no longer enjoy tariff reductions and exemptions on its exports to the US that it has received since 1997. The pending status of the renewal of GSP resulted from the call by two US lawmakers through their Cambodia Trade Act (CTA) in 2019 to review Cambodia’s eligibility. The renewal depends largely on the commitment of Cambodia to strengthen human rights and promote democracy. EBA and GSP as human right conditions This economic leverage has not only been utilized in Cambodia, but also applied to other developing countries across the world if the “serious and systematic violations” of human rights under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) are found. Basically, the “Enabling Clause” of the World Trade Organization (WTO) has allowed developed countries including the US and EU to grant GSP to LDCs or developing countries, and thus be eligible to put pressure on them. Research has shown that material capacity of great power, known as conventional approach, may facilitate the spread of new norms and promotion of international cooperation. What makes the GSP of the US and the EBA of the EU different from others, noticeably that of China which is the major competitor of Western countries, is their connection with respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, sometimes known as “trade-human rights”. They allow the US and EU to link the GSP with human rights conditions and sometimes use restrictive conditions to link business objectives with political interests. Kimberly Ann Elliot, one of the economists interested in economic sanctions, pointed out that the motives behind the use of sanctions aligned with the three basic objectives of national criminal law: to punish, to deter, and to rehabilitate. The inconsistency of the Cambodian government The decision of the EU and US to impose trade and economic sanctions on Cambodia was inspired by their views that Phnom Penh would restore its current situation of human rights. However, the Cambodian government has not made a significant improvement to these issues, especially since the partial withdrawal of EBA on 12 August 2020. In terms of political discourse, Prime Minister Hun Sen has repeatedly claimed that the US and EU have used EBA and GSP to serve their political ambitions and use the human rights issue as a pretext for interfering in internal affairs and thus violating the sovereignty and independence of Cambodia that should be respected under the UN Charter. In addition, rather than finding solutions, Cambodia continues its actions that are considered as attributions to the recent development of human rights. For instance, in the latest report of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights (CCHR), the space to exercise fundamental freedoms in 2021 was still limited. CCHR used freedom of expression, freedom of association, and freedom of assembly as indicators to measure the progress, which are almost consistent with the core human rights needed to be restored in Cambodia. In this regard, the report demonstrates the unwillingness of the government to reconsider that pressure and especially the action plans that were proposed by the EU and the US. The consequences of the sanctions The reluctance of the Cambodian government to lessen human rights problems has not only worsened the consequences of EBA withdrawal and the pending status of GSP, but also impacted diplomatic relations with the West. Most people believe that Cambodia would experience a serious economic crisis in many industries and thus could directly affect its average growth rate. For instance, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) projected in late 2019 that the withdrawal of EBA would lead to a 3 percentage point decline in the growth of Cambodia’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product). This does not account for indirect effects, which may be substantial. These preferences are crucial to Cambodia because they have enabled the country to benefit from competitive advantage, promote economic development, and create employment opportunities. The projection has been correctly proven as the GDP growth of Cambodia has declined from 7.1% in 2019 to 3% in 2021, although it has been coupled with the impact of COVID-19 pandemic. Based on the report of the World Bank in 2022, it is found that the export of Cambodia to the EU market declined from 28.1% in 2019 to 19.2% in 2022, partly due to the partial withdrawal of EBA. Furthermore, at the same period when the GSP of the US for Cambodia also expired, Cambodia’s exports to the US have increased from 27.6% to 44.7%. However, it has not come without costs. Cambodia has faced the tariffs imposed by both the EU and US that could impact the revenue, in addition to its consequences for the employment sector. The alternatives that have been defended by the Cambodian government, for example, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and Cambodia-China Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA), would not substitute the benefits that Cambodia has enjoyed under the EBA and GSP preferences especially in the short run. Moreover, Cambodia is losing its international legitimacy as a result of this serious and systematic violation of human rights. Nonetheless, these are not including the uncertainty of the future and the closer monitoring of the EU that can lead to the full withdrawal of the EBA. What should be done? In light of these consequences, it is necessary for Cambodia to address issues of core human rights that are crucial not only for realizing human rights – one of the core missions of the Cambodian government, but also for restoring the GSP schemes of the EU and US. Firstly, the Cambodian government as the duty-bearer should firmly tackle unresolved and ongoing disputes caused by the ineffective implementation of human rights. An integrative approach should be an option so that all parties can mutually benefit from the settlement. Secondly, laws or regulations that restrict exercises of fundamental freedoms should be reversed and refrained from enacting. Otherwise, Cambodia would lose the dynamics of such exercises essentially from Cambodian youth. Lastly, politicians of Cambodia should not perceive the motives of trade and economic sanctions as a Western way of modern imperialism, yet as a loophole of democratization that needed to be closed by collaborating constructively with relevant stakeholders. * This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.
The Cambodian Government's Significant Role in Ending the Dispute between NagaWorld Protestors and the NagaWorld Group
Written by: Phat Malyta, a graduate student with a Bachelor's degree in Business Communication at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia Edited by: Dr. Heng Kimkong, Co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Cambodian Education Forum and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Cambodia Development Center (Photo Credit: Cambodian Center for Human Rights) There are many problems in Cambodia, such as deforestation, discrimination, injustice, corruption, and inequality, to name a few. One interesting problem that has been stuck for nearly one year and has yet to be resolved is the dispute between NagaWorld workers and the owner. This issue started because NagaWorld announced plans to cut off 1,329 staff because of the financial crisis resulting from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, a union member at NagaWorld said that the reason was to remove the independent union in the NagaWorld group. Most staff who have been laid off are union leaders, union activists, and staff delegates. NagaWorld workers have protested against the layoff outside the NagaWorld casino since December 1, 2021, asking for the casino corporation in Phnom Penh to reinstate workers after NagaWorld terminated more than 1,300 workers last year. Only around 100 workers are still holding out for reinstatement. The strike turned violent during the protest In the past, there were many obstacles for workers to protest because the security tried to block or arrest them and didn't allow them to gather together by putting up many metal fences. However, on August 11, 2022, around 100 NagaWorld strikers gathered near the NagaWorld building. During the protest, there were many metal barricades that security personnel put on to block the protestors from going near NagaWorld. The violence happened when the protestors tried to pull the metal barricades away from security personnel. According to Cambodianess, the violence left three women seriously injured, one with a broken nose, and several others slightly injured were sent to get medical treatment. As reported by Licadho, a uniformed officer punched one woman in the face leaving her unconscious and bleeding from the nose. This action violates the labor law's "right to protest" and the collective conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO). On August 15, 2022, workers' unions and human rights establishments condemned the government's crackdown on women strikers over disputes between the NagaWorld staff and company. Having launched a joint announcement, 38 unions and civil society organizations condemned the government's brutal crackdown to block people from strikes close to the casino, regardless of the strikers' pleas. They must be allowed to acquire a non-violent call in front of the company, which they stated follows the exertions law. On the contrary, after the ruthless crackdown, a Phnom Penh City Hall spokesman issued an announcement accusing the people of the use of violence in opposition to the government.” It is also noteworthy that the case was improved on August 16, 2022, when the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations on the human rights situation in Cambodia, Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn, visited the NagaWorld protesters. According to RFA, NagaWorld protesters were unexpectedly allowed to go directly in front of the NagaWorld casino for two days on Wednesday, 17 August, and Thursday, 18 August 2022, and the UN Human Rights in Cambodia also monitored the protest on Wednesday, 17 August 2022 and released a video footage on Facebook with a statement confirming that the rally was peaceful. The Cambodian government's significant role in ending the dispute The most significant role of the government is to provide everyone the right to get equal treatment and the right to advocate without violence and discrimination, especially for women workers, to fulfill their fundamental rights and labor rights. There are two main points that the government can end this dispute peacefully. First, the government must pay additional attention to the protection of protestors instead of attempting to prevent them. For example, the role of the government is to square with the protestors to indicate their temperament to unravel the matter with the owner of NagaWorld. It is also the most effective model for demonstrating good governance for the people in the country. Therefore, the government should guarantee a transparent, accessible, and truthful atmosphere for the protestors in the future. It can be an improved lesson for the government to boost law enforcement on human rights and labor rights by standing on the principle of justice while not taking any side. Second, the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training must urge concerned stakeholders and the ownerof NagaWorld to return to the negotiation table to unravel the matter by citing the need to respect labor law and international legal conventions. The Ministry has full authority to figure out with the owner and a union member of NagaWorld and to check on the policy and how to implement the law at NagaWorld concerning staff’s employment termination. Furthermore, applying for either side with the agreement and a win-win solution will be decent. It also helps each side understand more about the deals the employer or employees might raise throughout the negotiation process. If the Ministry can free up more space for people to discuss, debate, and offer solutions, it will improve the situation and create a space for both sides to consider and exchange their views on this issue. In conclusion, I do believe that nobody can end this mess except the government because it is responsible for enforcing the rules of law in society and providing justice to people within the country by taking a stance with the protestors and ensuring that any violence cannot happen throughout the protests again. Moreover, the government ought to acknowledge the importance of the right of the protestors to advocate for their liberty in the labor law. The Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training needs to work with both parties to resolve problems by respecting the labor law and protecting the people's interests. The Ministry needs to make an effort to work in partnership with the union activists as well as the Nagaworld company because this practice can give the government an additional tip, and it can assist the Ministry in grasping the scope of the problem for a much better solution. Finally, the government has to bring a positive impact to resolve this dispute by ensuring that everybody receives justice and respects the law in the country. * This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.
Land Privatisation in Cambodia Needs Improvement to Gain Public Acceptance
Written by: Sey Jakkrya, a 4th-year student majoring in International Relations at The University of Cambodia Edited by: Dr. Heng Kimkong, Co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Cambodian Education Forum and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Cambodia Development Center (Photo Credit: "La Vida de Aqua" by Quinn Ryan Mattingly is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.) Background of land reform Looking back at the history of land reform in Cambodia is crucially important, especially for observing the current land disputes. During the Khmer Rouge regime (1975-1979), all properties belonged to the state, meaning ownership was abolished. In 1989, after the collapse of the Pol Pot regime, the Cambodian government re-established private property rights because collectivism was ineffective to restore the economy at that time. As a result, the government decided to introduce and adapt to the free market hoping to achieve better economic benefits. Land was categorised into three types: land for domicile (ownership), cultivation land (state allocation), and concession land (starting from 5 hectares). In addition, the 1992 Land Law preserved the state rights as the legal owner over agricultural land and recognized the state land which was divided into two types: state public land and state private land. The concession was only granted on state private land. Subsequently, an official land title was also granted for residential and agricultural lands through the enforcement of the 2001 Land Law. Why land privatisation in Cambodia? With the aim of transforming the traditional style of the agriculture sector to modernisation, creating more job opportunities, and contributing to economic growth, private companies are granted the legal permission to clear up and cultivate on land considered as economic land concession (ELCs) by representative state institutions, either the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (MAFF) or the Ministry of Environment (MoE). Article 2 of the Sub-Degree on ELCS defined ELC as “ a mechanism to grant private state land through a specific economic land concession contract to a concessionaire to use for agricultural and industrial-agricultural exploitation,” particularly growing food or industrial crops, raising of animals and aquaculture, or constructing factories or facilities for processing domestic agricultural raw materials. In 2015, the first combined report between MAFF and MoE showed that 230 private companies received licences for ELCs covering a total of 1,934,896 hectares of which 122 companies from MAFF and 133 from MoE. The revenue of $80 million for 3 years was claimed by the government, in the same year, through ELCs since 2012. Following the law, it is compulsory for all concessionaires to pay rental fees of 5$ per hectare annually to the government. However, up to now, there is no ELCs assessment made available online for the public to access in order to follow and observe the progress and benefits of ELCs whether they reflect their main objective or not. Public aggrievement and disappointment over land concession Despite tax revenue of ELCs claimed by the government, a doubtful question has been raised whether the development is for improving public welfare or just benefiting a small number of powerful or rich people. It is because poor or low income families deeply and gradually depend on agricultural and environmental resources, lakes, or forests, so when those resources disappear or are damaged, it is hard for them to survive. It was reported that rural households’ income dropped for about 20 percent due to the severe limitation to access resources on which their life depends. Therefore, there are two responsive reasons to why many people have expressed their strong dissatisfaction with the complexity of concerns within the implementation of ELCs and their impacts for them and the environment. First, citizens, from villagers to activists, have been observed to always become innocent victims of land privatisation. After the land was granted to a local or foreign private company, residents would have been forcefully evicted with a short-time notice and given an unacceptable compensation which shows injustices toward them. Observing the case of the Boeung Kak lake, 4,253 families were evicted, but only about 1,000 families willingly accepted compensation from the City Hall. Because the government offered just a small amount of money and a small piece of land for some families, people hit on the street protesting to ask and seek justice for themselve, resulting in an arrest of a well-known activist In addition, indigenious people, estimated at 2 percent of the total population, are more likely to be involved in land disputes with private companies. For example, in 2017, over 3,000 of them signed a petition expressing concerns over the negative impacts caused by Chinese company Hengfu, a sugar plantation company. Second, since climate change has become a hot topic locally, regionally, and globally, the public is not ignorant of economic development causing environmental degradation anymore. Without conducting a public consultation and publicly releasing environmental and social impact assessments following law guidelines, ELCs mainly contribute to deforestation and in-filling lakes. From 2001 to 2018, Cambodia failed to protect 25% of the total tree cover, approximately 2.17 million hectares, from clearance for rubber plantation at most. In some cases, protected areas like Snuol Wildlife Sanctuary in Kratie province and Roneam Daun Sam Wildlife Sanctuary in Battambang and Banteay Meanchey provinces completely lost tree covers for rubber and cashew plantations because the land inside was granted to private companies through land concessions. Moreover, 16 of 26 important lakes and 41% of major wetlands located in Phnom Penh were filled and demarcated respectively for building boreys, residential-housing, and satellite cities. How to gain greater public acceptance? Three fundamental behaviour changes and one reinforcement mechanism would bring the Cambodian government with grateful acceptance from the public on future ELCs. Ensuring better public welfare, not focusing only on the rich, should be the top priority when approving development projects which can be done through public consultation. Providing appropriate compensation based on practical effects is compulsorily pursued by either giving a budget package or a large enough land plot to each affected families, which can be seen not only as an obligation mentioned in the law, but also as a moral responsibility. Publicly releasing environmental and social impact assessments is a must for the responsible state institutions to make it available and accessible for the public, which can be done through digital communication, to guarantee public transparency and accountability in good governance against the public criticism. Finally, the government needs to work on the reinforcement of the 2001 Land Law on granting land titles for residents because holding hard land titles helps prevent land conflicts, especially between the local people and private companies. Thus, having decided how long local people are granted hard land titles can be a good start for now. For example, villagers who lived on the land before private property rights were established in 1989 should receive land certificates. * This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.
Podcast
ក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយបើកគេហទំព័រឲ្យយុវជនសរសេរបញ្ចេញមតិដោយសេរី
ដោយ៖ វណ្ណ សុគន្ធា www.politikoffee.com គឺជាគេហទំព័រថ្មីមួយរបស់ក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយ ដែលទើបប្រកាសឲ្យប្រើប្រាស់ជាផ្លូវការនៅព្រឹកថ្ងៃសៅរនេះ។ គេហទំព័រនេះ អនុញ្ញាតឲ្យយុវជនដែលមានអាយុក្រោម៣០ឆ្នាំ អាចសរសេរបញ្ចេញមតិជាភាសាខ្មែរក៏បានឫ ភាសាអង់គ្លេសក៏ពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងរឿងនយោបាយ ឫ សង្គមផ្សេង។ ស្ថាបនិកក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយ លោកអ៊ូ រិទ្ធី បានលើកឡើងថា ការបង្កើតគេហទំព័រនេះ គឺដើម្បីជួយជំរុញឲ្យក្រុមយុវជនខ្មែរបង្កើតទម្លាប់សរសេរ និង ចេះវិភាគពីរឿងនយោបាយ និងរឿងសង្គមផ្សេងៗទៀត។ បើតាមស្ថាបនិករូបនេះ តាមរយៈក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយ ក្រុមយុវជនធ្លាប់តែបានបញ្ចេញមតិ និង ពិភាក្សាជជែកគ្នាដោយផ្ទាល់មាត់ តែមិនបានបញ្ចេញមតិតាមរយៈការសរសេរនោះទេ។ ដូច្នេះហើយគេហទំព័រនេះ នឹងបង្កើនចំណេះដឹងផ្នែកសរសេរ និង វិភាគបន្ថែមទៀតដល់ពួកគេ។ ថ្វីបើបើកឲ្យសរសេរដោយសេរីក៏ពិតមែន ប៉ុន្តែគេហទំព័រនេះក៏បានតម្រូវឲ្យធ្វើតាមនីតិវិធី និង ទាមទារលក្ខខណ្ឌមួយចំនួនផងដែរ។ លោកឃុន សីហា អ្នកគ្រប់គ្រងគេហទំព័រនេះ បានពន្យល់ថា មុននឹងបង្ហោះចូលក្នុងគេហទំព័រ ម្ចាស់អត្ថបទទាំងអស់ត្រូវផ្ញើមកកាន់អ្នកគ្រប់គ្រងផ្នែកនីមួយៗ ដូចជា ផ្នែកនយោបាយ សង្គម សេដ្ឋកិច្ច និងកិច្ចការបរទេស។ អ្នកគ្រប់គ្រងផ្នែកទាំងនោះ នឹងធ្វើការពិនិត្យអត្ថបទ មុននឹងបញ្ចូលទៅចូលក្នុងគេហទំព័រ។ ជាមួយគ្នានេះ ក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយបានទាមទារឲ្យយុវជនទាំងអស់ ត្រូវសរសេរដោយមានអំណះអំណាងច្បាស់លាស់ ហើយមិនត្រូវប្រើប្រាស់ពាក្យជេរប្រមាថ និង មិនវាយប្រហារខ្លាំងលើបុគ្គលិក ឫគណបក្សនយោបាយណាមួយឡើយ។ សូមបញ្ជាក់ថា ក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយ ឫ Politikoffee បានចាប់ផ្តើមបង្កើតឡើងកាលពីឆ្នាំ២០១១ ដោយយុវជនចំនួន៤ រូប។ ក្រុមនេះបង្កើតឡើងក្នុងគោលបំណងដើម្បីពង្រីក និង ពង្រឹងចំណេះដឹងផ្នែកនយោបាយ និងសង្គម បង្កើតវប្បធម៌ពិភាក្សា ដេញដោល និងតស៊ូមតិ និងលើកកម្ពស់សេរីភាពក្នុងបញ្ចេញមតិរបស់ក្រុមយុវជន។ មកដល់ពេលនេះ ក្រុមកាហ្វេនយោបាយមានសមាជិកប្រមាណ៣០០នាក់ក្នុងនោះ ៥០នាក់ ជាសមាជិកសកម្មដែលតែងតែចូលរួមកិច្ចពិភាក្សាតុមូលនៅរៀងរាល់រសៀលថ្ងៃសៅរ៍នៅទីស្នាក់ការអង្គការខុនរ៉ាដ ប្រចាំនៅកម្ពុជា៕ Original Link: https://www.rfi.fr/km/cambodia/politikoffee-ou-ritthy-24-01-2015
Cambodian leader's love-hate relationship with Facebook
By Kevin DoylePhnom Penh Published 7 January 2016 Prime Minister Hun Sen has ruled Cambodia with an iron fist for 30 years. Now, the self-styled strongman is focusing his formidable political and security apparatus on a new theatre of operation - Facebook. Last week, he warned social media users to cease insulting him online or face arrest. The seeming anonymity of the internet would offer no shield, he said. "If I want to take action against you, we will get [you] within seven hours at the most," Hun Sen said in speech, naming the Facebook user he was warning, local media reported. A few days later, Hun Sen issued another warning to "extremists" in the opposition party, accusing them of altering a photograph of his wife and posting it to Facebook. Those responsible will face the law, he said. Facebook has emerged as a serious political force in Cambodia since the country's 2013 national election, which Hun Sen almost lost. That year, young, social media-savvy voters rallied to the opposition party, using the site to share news and information, and coordinate their campaigns. After TV, the social network has become the second most important platform for Cambodians to access information. Hun Sen's near debacle in the election - his party lost 22 seats in parliament - forced a strategy rethink, which included learning from the opposition's use of social media. He has now launched a digital counter offensive. IMAGE COPYRIGHTFACEBOOK image captionIt took Hun Sen a while to reveal a Facebook page with his name was actually his official page In September, Hun Sen revealed that a Facebook page that had long borne his name - though he denied operating it - was, in fact, his official page. He admitted ownership only after the page garnered one million likes. The timing may have had something to do with Hun Sen's arch rival, opposition party leader Sam Rainsy, who has close to two million likes on his page. A latter-day social media zealot, Hun Sen now delivers live addresses on Facebook, posts selfies, and uploads all manner of documents and photos, from images of his grandchildren to a recent shot of an old comrade ill in bed. He has also launched a new personal website and his own Hun Sen app for Android phones - (iOS follows soon). And his Facebook page has 1.7 million likes and counting. Hun Sen has adopted social media, but he has not embraced the culture of free speech often associated with a digital landscape, said Ou Ritthy, a political blogger and commentator. "Hun Sen said very clearly he knows immediately, within seven hours, whoever criticizes him using bad words." Defining what constitutes an insult in Hun Sen's books is impossible to guess, he says, adding that the prime minister's warnings have caused many to think twice about what they post. On a more positive note, Hun Sen could have shut down all social media after it contributed to his party's near election loss in 2013, said Ou Ritthy. He chose not to do that. Instead, he is trying to control the digital debate. "On one hand, Hun Sen tries to engage [on social media]. But, on the other, he tries to dilute, he tries to weaken other users who seem to disagree with him." IMAGE COPYRIGHTAFP image captionA late convert to social media, Hun Sen has embraced it with enthusiasm And there are serious consequences for stepping over the prime minister's social media line. Last August, a 25-year-old political science student was jailed on charges of incitement after writing on his Facebook page that he wanted people to participate in a "colour revolution" to change society. The same month, Hun Sen ordered the arrest of an opposition party senator for posting a video clip on Facebook featuring a falsified government document. Arrest warrants have also been issued for Sam Rainsy, already in self-imposed exile, and two senior members of his social media team, who have already fled Cambodia, over the senator's Facebook post. Sok Eysan, spokesman for the ruling party, said Hun Sen's warnings were simply to "encourage" social media users to be constructive in their criticism and to prevent defamation, which is punishable as a crime. IMAGE COPYRIGHTEPA image captionSupporters of the prime minister say he just wants to encourage constructive debate With more than one million people liking her Facebook page, high school student Thy Sovantha became Cambodia's first social media star during the 2013 election. Posting plucky video reports to her Facebook page along with cutting commentary on the government, Sovantha became a symbol of youth support for political change after three decades of Hun Sen's rule. Sovantha said she does not intend to temper her commentary following Hun Sen's latest warnings, explaining that she only engages in "strong, constructive criticism", and does not use "rude words". "In 2013, Facebook changed society," she said. "More and more people use Facebook and they are more active." "Now it's not only young people, but also old people… I have looked at the comments on my page, the public are not scared." Additional reporting by Phorn Bopha Orignal Link: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35250161
As Demographics in Cambodia Shift, Youth Seek Political Change
By Julia Wallace, Feb. 17, 2016, The New York Time PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — Thy Sovantha, Cambodia’s youngest political star, is still seething. A charismatic student, she rocketed to fame during the 2013 elections when she backed the opposition’s effort to unseat Cambodia’s authoritarian ruler. Her Facebook page drew hundreds of thousands of followers, making her, at 18, perhaps the most powerful voice of her generation. The opposition nearly won the election, but protests over the vote led to a government crackdown. By November, the political battle had come down to a single standoff: The government threatened to arrest the opposition leader, Sam Rainsy, if he set foot in Cambodia again. Mr. Sam Rainsy, who was traveling abroad, vowed to return. Ms. Thy Sovantha put out a call on YouTube and rallied hundreds of her supporters to meet him at the airport. But at the last minute, he canceled his flight and fled to France. “I was very angry,” Ms. Thy Sovantha said. “The reason we supported him is that we want change. If he does not come back like this, we think, how can we change the leader? How can we win?” The question is a riddle in Cambodia, which has been stuck in roughly the same political cycle for decades. For 30 years, Prime Minister Hun Sen, a former Khmer Rouge fighter, has wielded power through a combination of threats, clever deal-making and sheer willpower. And for most of that time, Mr. Sam Rainsy, a French-educated former finance minister, has been his foil. Some commentators here compare the pair to Tom and Jerry. Mr. Hun Sen, who met with President Obama at a regional summit meeting in California this week, tolerates periods of relative freedom and political dissent to a point, but resorts to coups, crackdowns and court cases when serious challenges arise. Sam Rainsy, center, leader of the Cambodia National Rescue Party, being greeted by supporters and journalists at the airport in Phnom Penh, the capital, in August.Credit...Heng Sinith/Associated Press Mr. Sam Rainsy is now as well known for fleeing the country in the face of legal threats as he is for his reform-minded agenda. His retreat to France was his third in a decade. For many Cambodians, the 2013 election was the biggest opportunity yet to break out of that rut. Youth like Ms. Thy Sovantha were a central part of that hope, as a demographic shift gave them a larger say than ever before. Two-thirds of the population is under 30, making Cambodia one of the youngest nations in Asia, according to United Nations estimates. The first generation to grow up after the horrors of the Khmer Rouge regime faded and the economy began to grow at a rapid clip, they are better educated and more skeptical than previous generations. Increasingly, they get their news online rather than from traditional television and print news media, which are dominated by the governing party. Politically, they are restless, having outgrown the authoritarian style and patronage system of Mr. Hun Sen. But having come so close to ousting him and failed, many are disillusioned. And now some are starting to give up on Mr. Sam Rainsy as well. “I feel disappointed and hopeless,” said Ms. Thy Sovantha, now 20. His decision not to return to Cambodia, analysts say, was a lost opportunity, if not a surprise. “The biggest threat to Hun Sen’s grip on power would be Sam Rainsy in jail,” said Ou Virak, the founder of Future Forum, a research institute. “The international condemnations and the potential closing of the American market in the garment industry, that would be nerve-racking for businesspeople.” The ruling Cambodian People’s Party gloated at the retreat. “In simple terms, he’s a coward,” a party spokesman told The Cambodia Daily. Thy Sovantha, 20, in her new video recording studio in Phnom Penh, the capital of Cambodia.Credit...Luc Forsyth for The New York Times But even his supporters were disappointed. Ou Ritthy, 28, the founder of a youth political discussion group, said he and his peers were exasperated with the cat-and-mouse game of Cambodian politics. “Hun Sen, many things he has been doing are for power, for party interests, and Sam Rainsy also does the same,” he said. “It’s old-style politics in a new society.” Mr. Ou Ritthy credits the sharp rise in Internet penetration and smartphone use for changing the dynamic here. “Youth have two things,” he said. “Information — they got informed from social media — and smartphones. They are more independent in terms of information. They are not told what to do by their parents like in the past.” After two opposition lawmakers were dragged from their cars and severely beaten in October, Facebook sleuths managed to identify several attackers as members of government security forces. Both parties are keenly aware of the demographic shift and are trying to chase the changing electorate. In his absence, Mr. Sam Rainsy has led town halls via Skype and shared political commentary and vacation snapshots with his fans on his widely followed Facebook page. Shirtless photos of him piloting watercraft at a luxury resort in the Philippines inspired heated debates on his character. Mr. Hun Sen joined Facebook in September and has taken to it with a vengeance. He is particularly fond of posting candid snapshots of himself — sitting on the ground slurping up street noodles, swathed in a medical gown receiving a checkup, watering plants in a public garden and even taking selfies during a regional summit meeting. According to a study by the public relations firm Burson-Marsteller, he already ranks second among world leaders for engagement with Facebook followers. He is increasingly conducting government business on Facebook. He has made several policy changes based on complaints posted to his personal page, and last week, he announced the creation of dozens of “Facebook working groups” to gather information about citizens’ concerns. Sun Heng, a 22-year-old university student, said he and most of his friends followed both leaders on Facebook but were still skeptical about the sexagenarians’ embrace of social media. “For me, I find it very pretentious: Sometimes it is so obvious that they are acting,” he said. “But it can also be a good sign, showing that they care what people think now.” Mr. Sam Rainsy clearly believes he has demographics on his side because Cambodia’s young people want a change. He has vowed to return by the next election, in 2018. “This is for me the fourth time that I am forced into exile,” he said by Skype from his home in Paris. “But eventually, each time, the situation changes, and I always manage to be back in time.” The question for Cambodia is whether his followers will still be waiting. Ms. Thy Sovantha seems to have moved on. She has told her followers, who now number 1.2 million, of her disillusionment with Mr. Sam Rainsy. Her Facebook posts focus increasingly on education and environmental issues rather than party politics, and she is channeling her energy into starting a center for homeless youth. But she may not have entirely given up on the system. On her Facebook profile, she describes herself as “politician.” Correction: Feb. 18, 2016 An earlier version of a picture caption with this article referred incorrectly to the building shown in Phnom Penh. It is the Cambodian People’s Party headquarters, not the Senate. Orignal Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/world/asia/cambodia-hun-sen-sam-rainsy.html?_r=0
With connectivity boom, Cambodia's political battles shift online
SEBASTIAN STRANGIO, Contributing writer, December 25, 2015 - Nikkei Asia PHNOM PENH -- In September 2015, a Facebook page bearing the name of Prime Minister Hun Sen notched up its millionth "like." Until then, the long-serving Cambodian leader had denied ever using social media, making fun of political rivals, like opposition leader Sam Rainsy, who were active online. But with its following now in seven figures, Hun Sen finally not only admitted the page was his but began to promote it. "We started it first as a test," Sok Eysan, a spokesman for the ruling Cambodian People's Party, told local media. "Then we saw that it has attracted popularity and is very popular among citizens, so we made it official to widen communication between top leaders and the people." Since then Cambodia's prime minister has enthusiastically embraced Facebook. His page, which features everything from live-streamed speeches and ribbon-cuttings to photos from Hun Sen's 31 years in power, is now one of the fastest growing in Cambodia in popularity terms. In the past three months it has leapt to 1.55 million fans, making it the country's seventh most popular page, according to Socialbakers, a social media tracking site. Rainsy, the premier's long-time rival, sits in third place, with nearly 2 million followers, but at the current rate, Hun Sen should out-"like" him sometime in the next year. Hun Sen's dive into the digital world reflects the ruling CPP's broader campaign to extend its presence online following a sharp fall in its popularity at the last national election in 2013. Confident of victory, the party saw its majority plunge from 90 seats in the 123-seat National Assembly to just 68. The main beneficiary was Rainsy's Cambodia National Rescue Party, which cleverly used social media platforms like Facebook and YouTube to circumvent the CPP's tight control of the press and disseminate information about problems like land-grabs, police violence, and corruption. Cambodian blogger Ou Ritthy at one of his "Politikoffee" meetings. "It was a blessing for the opposition to have Facebook at the time," said Ou Ritthy, a blogger who runs Politikoffee, a weekly political discussion group. "The opposition had no access to other media." Ritthy said that the CNRP's social media successes served to jolt Hun Sen and his government into the digital age. "They want to attract new voters," he said, "and a lot of young people have started to use Facebook." Internet boom The election took place in the midst of Cambodia's recent Internet boom. Since 2010 the number of Cambodians online has leapt from 320,000 to more than 5 million -- around a third of the population -- according to official government figures. As in neighboring countries like Myanmar, this has been fueled by strong economic growth and the increasing availability of cheap, web-enabled smartphones. A report issued in November by the Asia Foundation and the Phnom Penh-based Open Institute found that some 40% of Cambodians now own a smartphone, twice the number as in 2013. More than 98% of those accessing the Internet do so from mobile devices. "There's a lot changing. Just the pace of the adoption of the smartphone is mind-boggling," said Silas Everett, the Asia Foundation's country representative for Cambodia. Strongman and Family Man: in a photo posted on his Facebook on November 29, Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen poses with two granddaughters. The report also found that the Internet has become the country's second-most important source of information, after television. "People generally come online to socialize and meet friends and things like that, but as they start getting on Facebook, they want to get information about news and events. It's a dynamic process of engagement," Everett said. With an estimated 3 million Cambodians now on Facebook, and many more expected to log on in coming years, social media looms as a crucial political arena ahead of local elections in 2017 and crunch national polls the following year. After its shock losses in 2013, the Cambodian government made a concerted push to counter the CNRP's strong online presence. Politicians, ministries, and other government bodies were instructed to open Facebook pages. (Even the CPP's Heng Samrin, the octogenarian president of the National Assembly, has a profile, boasting a more modest 13,436 "likes"). In June, according to a Reuters report, the government held mandatory classes for 400 heads of schools in Phnom Penh, in which they were shown how to open Facebook accounts and defend the government from negative messages online. In this Facebook posting from December 12, Hun Sen plays volleyball with political colleagues in 1991. The CPP's cyber-strategy is best encapsulated by Hun Sen's Facebook page, which has been used both to promote government achievements and to craft a softer public image for the pugnacious leader. Between information about bridge-openings and public speeches, the page has featured old family photos of Hun Sen with his wife Bun Rany and their children; other posts have shown a youthful Hun Sen playing sports with fellow politicians during the 1980s. "He is trying to show the public that he's a good leader, a good father, a good husband," said Ou Ritthy. This image posted on Hun Sen's Facebook page on December 14 shows the Cambodian leader and his wife Bun Rany in traditional wedding regalia, c. 1988. Phay Siphan, a spokesman for the Council of Ministers, Cambodia's cabinet, said Facebook offered Hun Sen and other leaders the benefit of "two-way communication". "The prime minister learns from his own people what the people want and what the people don't like," he said. "It's not targeted to the election, it's targeted to better serve the people." New way to engage It is true that social media has given people a new way of putting pressure on public officials. In July, Sok Bun, a Phnom Penh property tycoon, was caught on a restaurant's CCTV camera savagely beating an entertainer and former TV presenter. The footage was leaked online and quickly went viral. In the face of rising public outrage, Hun Sen condemned the attack and the tycoon was arrested. Thy Sovantha, a prominent Facebook user who helped disseminate news of the beating, said that in years past, a man like Sok Bun would have escaped punishment. "Before, everyone was afraid of rich people, or oknha [tycoons], or the government," she said. At the age of 20, Sovantha is already the doyenne of Cambodia's social media scene. Her Facebook page, a stream of fashion selfies and commentary on issues such as anti-government protests, rural poverty, and border disputes with Vietnam, now counts just under a million fans -- more than most leading politicians. "Facebook is like a mirror": Thy Sovantha, 20, has amassed nearly a million Facebook followers by posting mix of fashion selfies and news about politics and social issues. This photo, posted on November 30, received more than 83,000 likes and 1,400 comments. Many of Sovantha's fans signed up in the run-up to the 2013 election, when the high-school student started posting opposition news alongside glamorous selfies and photos. Unlike TV, which is tightly controlled by the government, Sovantha noted in an interview that the Internet has given Cambodians a way to make direct demands of their leaders. "Facebook is very important. It's like a mirror for our government and for our people," she said. Ritthy agrees that the Internet and digital media has great potential. So far, however, it has had limited effect on the quality of the country's political debate. He pointed out that Cambodian Internet users are much more likely to "like" individual politicians than their parties, reflecting the continuing precedence of personality over platform in Cambodian politics. Supporters of both parties, meanwhile, have used the Internet to spread old rumors, insults, prejudice, and misinformation. Old habits die hard To a large extent, Cambodia's old political battles have simply moved online. As the "culture of dialogue" established by Hun Sen and Rainsy collapsed earlier this year, the two men have used Facebook to continue their two-decade-long political jousting. In mid-November, after the government activated an old arrest warrant against Rainsy, effectively forcing him into self-exile, he made a Facebook post branding Hun Sen a "dictator" and comparing himself to Aung San Suu Kyi, whose opposition party had just won a landslide election victory in Myanmar. Hun Sen responded by live-streaming a speech on his Facebook page in which he called Rainsy "the son of a traitor to the nation," referring to his father's opposition to Prince Norodom Sihanouk. "They face off," Ou Ritthy said of the dueling Facebook pages. "They compete not just in terms of fans and followers -- their content is attacking each other." In other words: business as usual for Cambodian politics. Ritthy said that while the quality of online debate was slowly improving, Facebook and other digital platforms offered no short-cut to lasting political change -- something which would need to begin offline. "It's just a platform," he said, "but it needs content." Original Link: https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Policy-Politics/With-connectivity-boom-Cambodia-s-political-battles-shift-online