The Unbearable Lightness of Being a Dictator!

"The Twin"(Courtesy of Sacravatoons).

"Sewer Rats" (Sacravatoons).

By School of Vice

Another groundbreaking ceremony (the construction of a Chinese-funded bridge), another platform for Mr Hun Sen to unleash his pent up frustration and anger against his critics in "the media" and elsewhere who lately have seen it fit to dangle the ignominious and humiliating fate of Libya's Col Gaddafi before him as a timely reminder of what dictators and violent rulers could look forward to at the end of their lengthy but equally violently terminated political careers. 

As usual, it is left to a bunch of much condescended "puny" online, and largely anonymous news blogs - need I name them? - to do the work no ‘respectable’ news outlets in Cambodia would contemplate doing, out of fear of undermining carefully constructed network vis-a-vis the corridors of power. Contrary to the quoted statement of the publisher of the Phnom Penh Post - a foreign-managed news outlet - Cambodia does not enjoy the "freest media climate in Asia,” or something to that effect. There is certainly much perceived lack of professionalism among the local Khmer press and media community, but this situation or short-coming being the case as it were ought to call for appropriate remedy in the form of the existence of an independent national media watch dog or tribunal. Moreover, considering the existence of anything 'independent' (beside regime-affiliated institutions) is out of the question under a dictatorship, any perceived issues we have with press and media codes of conduct and professionalism seem either irrelevant or secondary so long as such 'professionalism' comes about on the back of the sacrifice by the media community as a whole, made upon fundamental principles associated with the freedom of expression of diverse opinions. 

So at least, a student graduation ceremony, an inaugural address at a construction site would always be a monopoly for the "Prime Minister" to launch his war-talk and threaten violence against potential rivals to the political throne. Even as he infuriatingly dismisses the comparison made, the man unwittingly justifies it by ruling out or outlawing any opinion other than his own and by holding forth the spectre of punitive violence as the only fate awaiting those who attempt to remove him from his throne. If he is democratically and legitimately elected by the Cambodian people as he claims to be, then why not engage dissenting opinions through independent democratic forums rather than using one-sided, state-led party apparatus to throttle them, in addition to these constant verbal threats and murderous sanctions against anyone who manages to get under his skin? That would appear to be at odds with most people's understanding of parliamentary democracy where the administration of public affairs (outside of exceptional national emergencies or circumstances) is expected to be enacted by way of consensus, transparency and open public debate, the absence of which cannot be said to be conducive to the developmental process of sound governance or professional ethics in all spheres of public and civil life, including journalism and the media. 

How important is the role and relevance of professional ethics to a Khmer reporter, a journalist, a teacher or anyone who immerses his/her existence in, and derives life’s meaning or fulfilment out of, the knowledge that such immersion positively affects the cause, or facilitates the aspirations, of the society to which they feel they belong in some way when an individual stands powerless in defending his/her actions anyway, be they meet some accepted personal or professional moral standard or otherwise so long as the ability and right to legislate what is 'right' and 'wrong' remain the monopoly of the powerful few or - in this case - that one person who is only accountable to Himself? With every general election over the last 20 years invariably having delivered a “landslide” mandate, why agonises over this comparison to a Middle-Eastern dictator, unless, that is, some elements of truth are embedded in the comparison somewhere?  Or, is truth as it is, simply too much for some to bear?