Victims attending the trial of Kaing Guek Eav – a.k.a. Duch – were outraged when, on August 27th, the court’s trial chamber challenged their participation in the final phase of the trial.

By Thierry Cruvellier, Phnom Penh

Preliminary internal discussions on the role of civil parties had been held within the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) for several months. On August 21st, the result of these efforts was presented at the last minute to civil society organizations and human rights NGOs.

However, on August 27th, a majority of first instance judges suddenly revealed their determination to enact broad reforms regarding the participation of victims before the court.

In the middle of the morning, the trial chamber announced that, by a vote of four to one, it would not allow civil parties to be involved in debate over sentencing.

But that was just the first blow.

The day before, the trial chamber had also asked all parties to the trial to give their opinion regarding the right of lawyers for civil parties to participate in the final phase of the process—that of the presentation of character witnesses such as psychological experts and defense witnesses.

The prosecutor defended the right of civil parties to examine these witnesses. “There are two choices: either one is party [to the trial] with everything that means, or one is not,” warned trial attorney Vincent de Wilde, dismissing the idea that there could be such a thing as a “half party”. “It is not justified that the civil parties suddenly be reduced to silence …. That would be a mistake,” he concluded, while suggesting some changes, such as a reduction in the time allotted to speak.

“You sowed the wind, you reap the whirlwind”
After the lunch break, the defense took the opportunity to sow a bit more trouble for the other side. “You thought yourselves as prosecutors,” François Roux told lawyers for the civil parties, “You have sowed the wind, you reap the whirlwind.”

After a recess, the chamber handed down its decision. It was a slap in the face: the civil parties found themselves excluded, de facto, from the final phase in the process. Judge Jean-Marc Lavergne, who had disagreed twice with his peers, looked somber andthe announcement plunged the courtroom into silence.

When arguments reopened on August 31st, 28 civil parties gathered in front of the court building saying they were boycotting the trial. In the court, the few victims’ lawyers still present made their protest heard, just barely avoiding contempt of court.

It seemed the trial would draw to a close in an atmosphere of mourning and anger, with the image of empty rows, where for five months the victims and their families had sat.

New method of representation
But by the time the session ended on September 11th, the worst seemed to have been avoided and the abolition of civil parties was ruled out.

A working committee was established to define a new method of representation for the civil parties by January. The suggested process would be the nomination, either independent or through the court, of “principal co-lawyers” for the civil parties who, on a case by case basis, could appeal to lawyers for other specific victim groups.

After having threatened to radically end victim participation, the ECCC seems to have decided to move forward with the civil party experiment, provided changes are made along the way.

Download the print version of the International Justice Tribune 89 (PDF file)

Subscribe to the International Justice Tribune