On November 20, a day after the arrest of former Khmer Rouge president, Khieu Samphan, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) held its first public hearing in the Duch case. It was a legal christening marked by a debate on the prolonged detention of the accused and, for the public who came to watch, by the amateur televising of the events. On the morning of November 20, around 500 people filled the large auditorium of the ECCC. In theory, it should serve as the primary courtroom for the trial of former Khmer Rouge leaders, but a year and a half after the Court opened, it is still not ready for use. So those present had to follow the hearing on two giant screens, due to the lack of space in the small room where for two days the Pre-Trial Chamber heard the petitions of the accused to be temporarily released or at least placed under house arrest. It was a historic moment, particularly with the public appearance of the man who ran the S- 21 torture center in Phnom Penh from 1975 to 1979, who is accused of the death of at least 14,000 people. Unfortunately for the public, the event was quite difficult to follow—absurd framing, ridiculous angles and poor, blurred images were all they saw. International tribunals have never really shined where image is concerned, but the on-screen debut of the ECCC was, from this point of view, the worst of them.

Eight years of provisional detention

Before being indicted by the ECCC on July 31, 2007, Duch spent 8 years, 2 months and 20 days in prison. His lawyers want this long detention without trial to be recognized as a violation of his rights. "Is it acceptable that having spent more than eight years in temporary detention, [he] should have his provisional detention extended by an additional year? The courts must respect real rights, not theoretical ones. Anyone can make moving speeches about human rights, and there is no shortage of them, but you, the judges, are the ones who can concretely enforce them. If not, who will do it in your place?" argued French lawyer François Roux. At the beginning of August, the investigating judges conceded the "problematic" nature of the situation, without however proposing a solution. "Everyone agrees that this poses a problem in regards to national and international norms. The point of this appeal is to find a solid solution to the violation of which Duch was a victim," offered Roux. "We are not asking for the proceedings to be cancelled. We are asking that the ECCC admit that there has been a violation and that it requires reparation. That's all." For his part, the prosecutor suggests postponing the debate. "There does appear to be issues with the lawfulness of the detention of the accused," admits Robert Petit, but he is requesting that this question not be addressed until the trial is completed.

Chum Mey, 77, is one of the three S-21 survivors still alive. He did not miss a second of the two days of hearings. The first day, he was part of a dozen people selected by the court services to have the privilege of being present inside the courtroom. "I am happy to have seen Duch face to face. He still seems brutal. I am not scared that he will be released, but why free him? What is the problem regarding human rights? Why does he have rights and my family does not?" he said upon leaving the court. Kek Galabru, president of the Cambodian human rights association Licadho, tried to find the middle ground: "The ECCC must serve as a model. Yes, the people have emotions, but we are here to explain. Everyone knows who Duch is, but we are talking about international rights and laws here. Acknowledging that a violation occurred costs nothing. However, I do not believe the court will release Duch. If it did, people would protest. That has to be taken into account."

On December 3, the preliminary chamber decided it was incompetent to decide Duch's pre-trial detention and ordered his staying in trial.