Lee Morgenbesser, an expert on authoritarian regimes, said the elections would “absolutely not” be free and fair, even with the CNRP’s participation.
“The minimum standard requires that all parties and candidates be subject to the same procedures for registering and appearing on the ballot; all campaign and compete on a level playing field; all have equal access to the media; voters be free to vote for their preferred candidates; and official results accurately reflect the votes that were cast,” he explained.
Cambodia has failed to satisfy each of these requirements – and few would be resolved even if the CNRP were revived.
===
The government has even abandoned symbolic gestures such as Phnom Penh’s “Freedom Park,” established in 2010 to satisfy the country’s Law on Peaceful Demonstrations. The park, which hosted mass protests following the disputed 2013 elections, is supposed to be a designated area for citizens to gather in protest. It was closed down after Hun Sen ordered it to be relocated to the outskirts of the city, around 4 kilometers away from the original park. The relocation seems to violate a clause in the law that requires the park be easily accessible to the public. Today, 10-foot high metal walls have cropped up around the park, blocking access entirely.
The closure of Freedom Park may make little difference, given that Hun Sen has expressed his willingness to kill 100-200 people to maintain stability, and Ministry of Interior spokesman Khieu Sopheak bragged that nobody “dares” to protest.
The forced exclusion of the CNRP has understandably grabbed headlines. But the restrictions on free speech, media, civil society, freedoms of association and assembly, and the possible absence of election observers indicate that even if the CNRP were miraculously resurrected, the Cambodian elections would still be a far cry from free and fair.
If passed, the bill must be enacted into law within 180 days, although it is not yet clear when the House will vote on the legislation.
The Cambodia Democracy Act 2018 states that democracy has failed in Cambodia despite “decades of international attention and assistance,” and condemns the deteriorating situation for political rights, civil society and the free press.
The legislation’s co-sponsor, Alan Lowenthal, called the bill a “major step” towards holding Hun Sen and his associates accountable.
“I believe these sanctions will get the attention of the Cambodian government,” Lowenthal said in a statement, stressing that the US and world must act urgently. “I also believe that our action today will encourage other members of the international community to take similar actions and bring additional pressure to bear on Hun Sen.”
Cambodian officials identified as being involved in undermining democracy are already banned from traveling to the US following a December decree from the State Department.
There are now bills in both the US Senate and House that would impose asset freezes, although the Senate bill goes even further by requiring that the US oppose loans to Cambodia from international financial institutions. It also bans any negotiations on the more than US$500 million debt Cambodia owes America dating back to the 1970s.
Cambodian officials’ assets are difficult to track given that asset “declarations” sit in a closed envelope in the government’s Anti-Corruption Unit. Some high-ranking officials like Siphan are dual US-Cambodian citizens.
===
Rainsy also said Hun Sen “is holding his people hostage and blackmailing donor nations” by flaunting the negative effects sanctions would have on average Cambodians.
“I am calling on the Cambodian people to be prepared for some additional hardship in our current fight for a democratic and peaceful change,” he said. “As in any battle for a just cause, a short-term sacrifice may be required to secure a better future.”
While the US hasn’t threatened the garment industry specifically, officials have warned that further action is on the cards.
Sophal foresees more sanctions coming after the July elections, which he doesn’t expect the US to recognize as free, fair or legitimate. “It’s clear as day the US will reject the results of the election and I expect more sanctions as Cambodian democracy is not only undermined but completely gutted.”
Rather than a competition between the CPP and another party, the election is shaping up to be a competition between voters and abstainers. With the CPP all-but-guaranteed a win, it is voter turnout that counts. As Cambodian political analyst Meas Nee points out, the CPP’s concern is no longer winning the election, but maintaining legitimacy and “minimum recognition” from the international community.
“The Crackdown of Democracy in Cambodia” May 15, 2018
Coup detat in July 1997 by second Premier Hun Sen to depose first Premier Prince Norodom Rannaridh left Cambodia’s seat at the UNs vacant under the supervision of Credential Committee of the UNs. In that time, US was the core leader to lobby other nation-states to aid this seat postponement. With current setback of democracy, Cambodia shall be inevitably facing tensions with the international community especially the Cambodia’s legal seat at the UNs. The same political manoeuvring as the coup in 1997, before the arrival of election day in July is the dissolution of the largest opposition party Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) by the Supreme Court which is a politically motivated. Many scholars and political observers including the director of human rights watch Brad Adam have viewed this dissolution as a cold-blood coup detat.
This May 14, the National Election Committee (NEC) of Cambodia closed its political party registration date and declared 4 parties to be correctly registered by allowing another 5 days to fulfilling other parties. Prime Minister Hun Sen predicted before the work of NEC that there will be at least 10 parties to join the election while the Ministry of Interior issued a listed political parties of over 41 parties by stating as “listing at the Ministry” without specifying on those parties have properly worked with due processes according to the laws such as the requirement of 4000 membership registration and the deposit of money over $4000 dollars with the Treasury Department etc. The political parties released by the NEC has no Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) and the leadership of this party has issued a statement to “boycott” this upcoming July 29, 2018 election.
The contentious election face-up to between opposition CNRP and government-led party CPP has come amid a belief that, at least, over 5 million of Cambodian eligible voters will refrain themselves from going to the ballot-booth to peaceful protest the wrong doing and the denial of voters’ rights by Prime Minister Hun Sen leadership. This latest authoritarian decision-making of Prime Minister Hun Sen has significantly violated the existing national Constitution and the spirit the Paris Peace Agreement signed in October 23, 1991 to guarantee multi-parties (plural) democracy, human rights, sustainable development, and the rule of law of Cambodia. Hun Sen and his entourages will be more ease than the gun-firing coup in 1997, but the pressures and the caution of losing political legitimacy is remained the same. Once again, the leadership of CNRP has come out in stronger unity after the party dissolution till today, while the condemnation of the international community including the United Nations have come out stronger and stronger. Many measures have been laid out and more pressures from the democratic countries are needed.
Canadian government led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should join in hand with the United Nations and the International Communities to pressure on authoritarian leadership of Prime Minister Hun Sen and to help bring back democracy to Cambodia. During this occasion of welcoming Mr. Sam Rainsy, former leader of CNRP and its co-founder, and current leader of Cambodia National Rescue Movement (CNRM) to visiting Vancouver in May 20, 2018 at 2:00 pm to 5:30 pm, we would like to invite media, federal and local politicians, and all democratic friends, to join us this rare public forum at Guildford Park Secondary School: 10707 146 Street, Surrey, BC
UN Envoy on Human Rights Rhona Smith at a press conference on human rights in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, March 14, 2018. (Hul Reaksmey/VOA Khmer)
Rhona Smith said the government must immediately release the detained opposition leaders and lift a ban on the opposition taking part in the July 29 general election.
PHNOM PENH — Rhona Smith, the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights in Cambodia, has said that the country’s forthcoming national election will not be “genuine” without the participation of the banned Cambodia National Rescue Party.
The CNRP was dissolved by the Supreme Court last November after its leaders were charged with treason for their alleged role in a foreign-backed plot of overthrow Prime Minister Hun Sen.
“No election can be genuine if the main opposition party is barred from taking part,” she said in a statement.
Smith stressed that the government must immediately release the detained opposition leaders and lift a ban on the opposition taking part in the July 29 general election.
“Those who currently rule the country have one final opportunity to reverse the current trajectory, and return instead to the constitutional path of multi-party democracy and genuine elections —ensuring a level playing field for all political parties,” she added.
The appeal to the ruling Cambodian People’s Party came on the same day that the National Election Committee (NEC) announced the start of official registrations for the election, which is due to be held on July 29.
However, Hun Sen defended the process, saying in a speech that any delay to the election would be unconstitutional.
“The constitution must be changed for a delay. The law must be changed for a delay. The National Election Committee has no right to delay [the election] because this procedure is set by the law we made,” he said.
“A dead person that passed away was burned without knowing the whereabouts of the bone. It will not survive. Only the real parties can stand for the election. Thus, [we] see it in black and white,” he added, referring to the CNRP.
Hang Puthea, NEC spokesman, said Smith may have misunderstood legal proceedings in Cambodia, saying “at least ten political parties intend to take part in the election.
In March, a group of Cambodians in Europe gathered to protest at the United Nations Human Rights Council office in Geneva, Switzerland, as the body was due to review human rights situation in Cambodia.
WASHINGTON DC — Cambodians living overseas have increased their activism since a government crackdown on dissent began last year, according to activists.
Cambodians in Europe protested against political repression in Cambodia. (Courtesy photo)
Last month, a group of Cambodians in Europe gathered to protest at the United Nations Human Rights Council office in Geneva, Switzerland, as the body was due to review human rights situation in Cambodia.
Other demonstrations took place in the days leading up to the meeting, in Sydney, Australia, as Prime Minister Hun Sen attended a summit of Asean and Australian leaders.
Holding placards in support of political prisoners, including the jailed opposition leader Kem Sokha, protesters chanted anti-Hun Sen slogans.
“We, the Khmer people living abroad, do not forget our motherland and what’s happening there,” said Thay Makara, a Khmer community leader in Europe. “With social media, the connection with our countrymen remains close. We feel miserable to see our people suffer abuses.”
The Supreme Court dissolved Sokha’s party, the Cambodia National Rescue Party, in November and banned 118 senior party officials from politics for five years. The government has also used tax laws to pressure independent media and civil society groups into silence.
Activists have organized public forums and met their representatives in the United States and Canada to urge them to apply diplomatic pressure on Phnom Penh.
“At this point, our strategy is to demand a review of the Paris Peace Agreement in order to have a free and fair election, not the Russian-style one,” said Seng Sophoan, president of the Committee for Election Rights of Overseas Cambodians (CEROC).
The Vancouver-based CEROC has been working for years to demand voting rights for Cambodians overseas.
“What we have been doing is to urge donor countries to review the Cambodian government’s recent actions,” said Men Vannak, another community organizer, from Lowell, Massachusetts. “This government abuses democrats, civil society groups, and the opposition party.”
Cambodian community leaders from around the world gathered in Melbourne, Australia, for a three-day conference to discuss ways to tackle the challenges facing Cambodia in terms of its growing economy and society, including health, education, rural development, migration, and immigration.
Hong Lim, a member of the Victorian Legislative Assembly and the main organizer, hoped that the “World Khmer Conference” would find a way to address these challenges, which he considered “terribly troublesome” issues.
“We, the owners of our country, must be brave to face these challenges,” Lim said. “We must dare to find a solution together.”
The Economist Intelligence Unit ranked Cambodia’s democracy at 124 out of 167 countries, down from a “hybrid government” to a “dictatorship”, after it dissolved the main opposition party.
Many opposition politicians have fled the country to escape persecution and to continue their political activism, while some of their colleagues remain in the country.
“These are peaceful and non-violent protests by Cambodians overseas,” said Kuch Schanley, an independent analyst in Maryland. “The worrying trend is that the Cambodian government will continue to do whatever they want. They don’t want to listen to demands by people in and outside of Cambodia.”
“I believe that Cambodians inside the country can play a significant role, too, since the conflict is actually there,” he added.
Schanley said that overseas Cambodians from the US, Australia, Germany, Canada, and France, cannot fully help them alone.
“Once Cambodians inside the country call for external help, they should help themselves, too,” he said. “They have no strength and resources, but their compatriots outside can shake up the international community to provide protection so that they can overcome their fear and stand up to protect their national interest.”
Michael Sullivan, Cambodia Votes: Democracy, Authority, and International Support for Elections, 1993–2013. Copenhagen: NIAS Press [Governance in Asia series 5], 2016, xviii + 341 pp. ISBN 9788776941864, price: GPB 60.00 (hardcover), 9788776941, GBP 18.99 (paperback).
Michael Sullivan has written an exceptional chronicle of Cambodia’s modern electoral history, one that will serve as a reference for future scholars of Cambodia who may wish to study what democracy looked like, despite all its limitations, when it still existed in the country. (Full disclosure: I am a Trustee of the Center for Khmer Studies in Siem Reap where Michael Sullivan served as an Executive Director several years prior to my joining the Board.)
Systematically going from the UNTAC election of 1993 to the 2013 election, Sullivan details the inner workings of what Prime Minister Hun Sen and the ruling Cambodian People’s Party have done to ruthlessly amass power by hook and by crook. His Introduction has a good summary of the chapters that follow and provides a roadmap for what to expect. The chapters provide a lot of information—even I had trouble keeping-up with the details. (Thankfully, it was easy enough for this reader to remind myself of the events and to see them chronicled so richly and reconciled with my own understanding of the situation when they unfolded.)
From the very beginning, Sullivan makes clear that he ‘seeks to understand and explain the impact the 1993 UNTACelections had on the subsequent development of electoral politics in Cambodia up to and including polls in 2013’ (p. 2). He argues that ‘Beginning with UNTAC in 1993, the book argues that internationally supported elections have been the central site in a struggle between opposing political and civil forces for access to and control of the Cambodian state’ (p. 2),
There were two reasons for this. ‘Firstly, the Cambodian experience is unique in the fields of political transitions and electoral studies. International involvement and control of the transitional elections process was unparalleled in the early 1990s. Continued international technical and financial assistance for electoral development and engagement after UNTACis a key variable in understanding the ensuing struggle for control over the processes and outcomes of elections. Furthermore, new social and political forces that emerged from the UNTAC operation became significant players in the evolution of electoral politics’ (p. 2).
Secondly, ‘the Cambodian experience provides new insights into the inconsistencies and contradictions inherent in international support for multi-party democratic elections in conflict prone states. At the same time, the Cambodia case demonstrates that elections do hold out possibilities for meaningful social and political change despite manipulation and constraints placed upon them by authoritarian tendencies within the state apparatus.’ (p. 2)
The UNTAC period turns out to be a defining moment for Cambodian elections that goes well beyond 1992–1993, and would continue to impact Cambodia for a quarter century. ‘The question remained,’ ponders Sullivan, ‘what was the best way to handle UNTAC and the opposition parties?’ (p. 42). He posits that the biggest challenge to the CPP was the opening of new sources of information; what we might today in the age of Trump call “alternative facts”, instead of state propaganda. That information warfare continues to this day with a final assault on the Cambodia Daily, culminating in its closure on September 4, 2017, from a bogus $ 6.3 million tax bill, the banishment of Radio Free Asia and the National Democratic Institute. If one considers the CPP game plan, it has been and continues to be the elimination of all voices contrary to its own.
And what is old is once again new: Sullivan notes on page 93 that election monitoring of the past was characterized as suspect activity. Today this problem is simply repackaged when the “Situation Room”, a similar election monitoring meeting of like-minded NGOs, was characterized as a threat by Prime Minister Hun Sen.
