This is a third of a 4-part interview with Khieu Samphan, conducted by Mr. Heng Reaksmey of Voice of America Khmer Program, one day following the arrest of Ieng Sary on Monday 12th November 2007.
VOANEWS, 15th November 2007
Translated from Khmer by Khmerization
Heng Reaksmey(HR): Because Ieng Sary was one of the most important persons in the Khmer Rouge regime, what do you think Ieng Sary and his wife, Mrs. Ieng Thirith, were guilty of during that genocidal regime?
Samphan: I cannot say about their roles because we have different duties as I told you before. I only have some relationships with them later on. Before, they worked in different ministries. Ieng Sary was in charge of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Mrs Ieng Thirith was in charge of the Ministry of Social Affairs. And I was the president of the presidium. But in actual fact, my day to day duty was working in Office 870 distributing food/goods everday till my daughter, A Thae, who was just three years old at that time and who lived at a housing block behind the royal palace, remembered my job very well. She always came to visit me. And whenever she visited me she always picked up the phone and called to me "daddy, daddy, it's time to distribute the food/goods". She cannot speak properly but she can remember my job very well. That was my only job, even my daughter who cannot even speak properly knew that I was doing that job because she heard people telling me everyday to distribute food/goods. That was what I did.
HR: Mr. Khieu Samphan, did you do some study about the trial of Ieng Sary, Nuon Chea as well as Mrs. Ieng Thirith's trial?
Samphan: I cannot say anything as I told you before because I did not know fully about the internal affairs of the Party. And when I did my research I found that everything was done collectively. I did not find anything in details so I did not know in details. So I cannot answer that question.
HR: Mr. Khieu Samphan, the KR Tribunal has apprehended four people such as Ieng Sary, Mrs. Ieng Thirith, Nuon Chea and Duch, the chief of Tuol Sleng Prison. Do you think that these people will shift the blame and point the finger at each other?
Samphan: In regard to this I cannot make an assumption. I don't know. But I only know about myself. If someone wants to shift the blame and point the finger at me, it's ok. But if the Tribunal wants to charge me they should not consider their testimonies as evidence as crimes against humanity and crimes of genocide against me. They must have concrete proof such as written documents. I wrote in my previous book already in regard to my name being mentioned as a possible suspect amongst the seven Khmer Rouge suspects who would be brought to trial. Did you know about that? I have written and observed that there were no concrete evidence against me. People said that I was responsible for this and for that. They only assumed. In English the term that they used would be the word "would, would", and in French the term would be "voudrais, voudrais" in order to accuse and charge me. I believe that the Tribunal would not do like this. If it does like this it is unlawful because in criminal laws they must have clear principle. All charges must be based on written proof beyond reasonable doubt. In the judgement the important thing is the written evidence. For example, I have the duty of ordering the arrest of someone etc. They must have a clear proof, written documents to prove that. Or they must have written minutes of the Permanent Committee meetings which I have participated in order to make any decision to arrest someone, for example. They must have these kinds of proof to show to me. But I don't think the Tribunal will take someone's testimony. If they take someone's testimony I think it is not right. If the Tribunal will do like that I don't think that the Tribunal can claim to be a role model for Cambodia to follow in order to become a state of law. That's how I feel.
HR: Mr. Khieu Samphan, do you think that the decision of the Tribunal to detain Ieng Sary yesterday and in relation to him leading his troops to defect to the governemt's side in 1996 and he has already received a royal pardon from former king Norodom Sihanouk, what do you think about his arrest at this time?
Samphan: I would like to tell you that I cannot make any assumption about this issue. What evidence did the Tribunal find? His Majesty (Sihanouk) has already given a royal pardon to Ieng Sary. But when the Tribunal decided to arrest him I don't know what do they use as a base for his arrest. I don't know what reasons they have. I am sorry, I can't comment on this issue.//(To be continued on part 4...finall part)
No comments:
Post a Comment