A Change of Guard

សូមស្តាប់វិទ្យុសង្គ្រោះជាតិ Please read more Khmer news and listen to CNRP Radio at National Rescue Party. សូមស្តាប់វីទ្យុខ្មែរប៉ុស្តិ៍/Khmer Post Radio.
Follow Khmerization on Facebook/តាមដានខ្មែរូបនីយកម្មតាម Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/khmerization.khmerican

Friday 19 April 2013

Cambodia fires back at Thailand [The Cambodian team has done a great job here and thanks to the Bangkok Post for reporting objectively]

Published: 18 Apr 2013 
Bangkok Post

Cambodia On Thursday argued hard against Thailand's evidence regarding Phnom Penh's acceptance of the barbed-wire fence ordered to be put up by the Thai cabinet around Preah Vihear after the 1962 International Court of Justice ruling, and described the claim that Cambodia falsified maps as groundless.

Cambodian counsel Rodman Bundy
Rodman Bundy, one of the Cambodian lawyers, told the ICJ hearing in The Hague that Cambodia did not falsify the map as alleged by the Thai legal team. It only tried to delete a line that appeared in the Annex I map, known as the 1:200,000-scale map.
"We have not falsified the map as claimed by Thailand. But in fact, Thailand has attempted to limit our vicinity by setting up their own border line without our approval," he said.
Mr Bundy said although the court disseminated the Annex map 85D in the original judgement, it did not mention what this map used to refer to, and there was no need for the court to reconsider it despite the issue being raised by Thailand.
Alina Miron, a Romanian lawyer who is a member of the Thai legal team, told the court on Wednesday that Annex map 85D was one part of the big map the court reproduced to describe the temple's vicinity and the areas in which Thailand would have to withdraw its military.
Mr Bundy said it was pointless trying to merge the map with the current map presented to the court because Cambodia had not asked the court to look for the border line in the original case.
Mr Bundy said the barbed-wire fence erected by Thailand in 1962 around Preah Vihear Temple was not a border line as claimed by Thailand. It was done without any credible guideline, including the principle of a watershed line.
Moreover, the visit to Preah Vihear by the late Prince Norodom Sihanouk after the 1962 ruling was different from the visit of Thailand's Prince Damrong Rajanubhab to the temple before the ruling.
Prince Sihanouk protested over the issue several times in 1967,1968 and 1969 and he did not walk across the fence because he did not want to create a problem with Thailand.

He insisted the ICJ had already accepted the temple vicinity being included into Annex I. The temple's vicinity covered areas under the Annex I map and reached to the east and the west of a crosspoint agreed by the two countries.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thank goodness for Cambodia for having the best Team of International Lawyers to defend her. When it is all said and done, the 3 intellectual giants and must be honored and commemorated in Cambodia. They must be made honorable citizens of Cambodia. Their statues must be erected in the Preah Vihear Province. With them around, Cambodia feels safe and defended. Thailand's team is no match at all. Ethernal thanks to Mr. Rodman Bundy of the good old USA, Sir Franklin Berman of England, and Mr. Jean-Mark Sorel of France.

Anonymous said...

Let not celebrate too soon my friend, but wait for the Holiday to be here first. When the rulling comes and Cambodia win; the 3 lawyers must fully compensated even to the extend of erecting their statues or ingraving their names on Preah Wihear Temple. Cambodia MUST put up fences along his border NOT border posts. Border posts are placed to sparelingly apart and can be easily moved and encrochment between posts will continue to take place.I know it's costly, but in the long run we will save lots of money and lives. Pay and equiped our border guards well and not a grain salt will get through our border without being notice. Our border guards must be trained to follow the rule of "an eye for an eye"; treat our neightbore the way they treated us. Let them know that respect can NOT be bought but is ERANED.

Anonymous said...

True, I would not celebrate too soon even though our legal team presented the best evidences we still have to wait for the judge's decision.

With the evidences - the maps and the 1962 judgment on our side - we are confident that we have a much better chance of winning. However, the only worry is that the judge might think that the court and they have no jurisdiction to judge the case and therefore dismiss Cambodia's lawsuit. If that's what will happen, then Thailand will keep the parcel of land it had invaded and occupied. Then Cambodia might not accept it because it is Cambodian territory. However, if the court judged the land to belong to Cambodia then Thailand might not accept it either and armed clashes might follow suit.

Anonymous said...


I hope and pary that war will not take place between these two nations. As a Khmer I've seen enough sufferings and devastions to last me a life time, but if these baboons want war; Cambodia MUST be willing to all out.

Anonymous said...

Now we have Khmer Language (Google Translate):
ប្រទេស​កម្ពុជា​កាលពី​ថ្ងៃ​ព្រហស្បតិ៍​បាន​អះអាង​ថា​ស​រឹង​ប្រឆាំង​នឹង​ភស្តុតាង​របស់​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​ទាក់ទង​នឹង​ការ​ទទួល​យក​រាជធានី​ភ្នំពេញ​នៃ​របង barbed​-លួស​បាន​បញ្ជា​អោយ​នឹង​ត្រូវ​បាន​ដាក់​ឡើង​ដោយ​គណៈរដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី​ថៃ​នៅ​ជុំវិញ​ប្រាសាទ​ព្រះ​វិហារ​បន្ទាប់​ពី​តុលាការ​អ​ន្ដ​រ​ជាតិ​ឆ្នាំ 1962 នៃ​ការ​កាន់​អំណាច​យុ​តិ​្ត​ធម៌​និង​ការ​ពិពណ៌នា​អំពី​ប​ណ្តឹ​ង​ដែល​ថា​ប្រទេស​កម្ពុជា falsified ផែនទី​ថា​ជា groundless នេះ​។

ការ​ប្រឹក្សា​របស់ Rodman ប្រទេស​កម្ពុជា Bundy
Rodman Bundy មួយ​របស់​មេធាវី​កម្ពុជា​បាន​ប្រាប់​សវនាការ​តុលាការ​ក្រុង​ឡា​អេ​នៅ​ក្នុង​ទីក្រុង​ឡា​អេ​ថា​ប្រទេស​កម្ពុជា​មិន​បាន falsify ផែនទី​នេះ​ជា​ការ​ចោទ​ប្រកាន់​ដោយ​ក្រុម​អ្នក​ច្បាប់​របស់​ថៃ​។ វា​គ្រាន់​តែ​ព្យាយាម​លុប​បន្ទាត់​នោះ​បាន​បង្ហាញ​ខ្លួន​នៅ​ក្នុង​ឧប​សម្ព័ន្ធ​ផែនទី​ដែល​ខ្ញុំ​បាន​គេ​ស្គាល់​ថា​ជា​ផែនទី 1:200,000 ខ្នាត​មួយ​។
"យើង​មិនបាន falsified ផែនទី​អះអាង​ថា​ដោយ​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​។ ប៉ុន្តែ​ជា​ការ​ពិត​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​បាន​ព្យាយាម​ដើម្បី​កំណត់​តំបន់​ជុំវិញ​របស់​យើង​ដោយ​ការ​បង្កើត​បន្ទាត់​ព្រំដែន​របស់​ពួក​គេ​ផ្ទាល់​ដោយ​មិន​ចាំបាច់​មាន​ការ​អនុម័ត​របស់​យើង​" លោក​បាន​និយាយ​ថា​។
លោក​បាន​ឱ្យ​ដឹង​ថា​ទោះ​បី​ជា Bundy តុលាការ​បាន​ផ្សព្វផ្សាយ​ផែនទី​ឧប​សម្ព័ន្ធ 85D នៅក្នុង​សាលក្រម​ដើម​វា​មិន​បាន​បង្ហាញ​ពី​អ្វី​ដែល​ផែនទី​នេះ​ដែល​ត្រូវ​បាន​ប្រើ​ដើម្បី​យោង​ទៅ​ហើយ​មាន​តម្រូវ​ការ​នោះ​ទេ​សម្រាប់​តុលាការ​ដើម្បី​ពិចារណា​វា​បើ​ទោះ​បី​ជា​បញ្ហា​នេះ​ត្រូវ​បាន​លើក​ឡើង​ដោយ​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​។
Alina Miron ដែល​ជា​មេធាវី​របស់​រ៉ូម៉ានី​ដែល​ជា​សមាជិក​នៃ​ក្រុម​អ្នក​ច្បាប់​ថៃ​មួយ​បាន​ប្រាប់​តុលាការ​នៅ​ថ្ងៃ​ពុធ​នេះ​ថា​ឧប​សម្ព័ន្ធ​ផែនទី 85D គឺជា​ផ្នែក​មួយ​នៃ​ផែនទី​ដ៏​ធំ​មួយ​ដែល​តុលាការ​ឡើងវិញ​ដើម្បី​ពិពណ៌នា​អំពី​តំបន់​ជុំវិញ​ប្រាសាទ​ព្រះវិហារ​និង​តំបន់​នៅ​ក្នុង​ការ​ដែល​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​នឹង​មាន​ការ​ដក យោធា​របស់​ខ្លួន​។
លោក Bundy និយាយ​ថា​វា​ជា​ការ​ព្យាយាម​ដើម្បី pointless បញ្ចូល​ចូល​គ្នា​ជាមួយ​នឹង​ផែនទី​ផែនទី​បច្ចុប្បន្ន​ដែល​បាន​បង្ហាញ​ទៅ​កាន់​តុលាការ​នោះ​ទេ​ពីព្រោះ​ប្រទេស​កម្ពុជា​បាន​មិន​បាន​ស្នើ​សុំ​តុលាការ​ដើម្បី​រក​មើល​សម្រាប់​បន្ទាត់​ព្រំដែន​នៅ​ក្នុង​ករណី​ដើម​។
លោក Bundy បាន​និយាយ​ថា​របង​លួស barbed​-កសាង​ដោយ​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​នៅ​ឆ្នាំ 1962 នៅ​ជុំវិញ​ប្រាសាទព្រះវិហារ​មិន​មែន​ជា​បន្ទាត់​ព្រំ​ដែន​មួយ​ដែល​ជា​ការ​អះអាង​ដោយ​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​។ វា​ត្រូវ​បាន​ធ្វើ​ដោយ​មិន​គួរ​ឱ្យ​ជឿ​ការ​ណែ​នាំ​ណា​មួយ​ឡើយ​រួម​ទាំង​គោលការណ៍​នៃ​បន្ទាត់​ទី​ជម្រាល​មួយ​។
លើស​ពី​នេះ​ទៅទៀត​ដំណើរ​ទស្សនកិច្ច​ទៅ​កាន់​ប្រាសាទ​ព្រះ​វិហារ​ដោយ​ចុង​ព្រះអង្គម្ចាស់​នរោត្តម​សីហ​នុ​បន្ទាប់​ពី​សាលក្រម​ឆ្នាំ 1962 នោះ​គឺ​ខុស​គ្នា​ពី​ដំណើរ​ទស្សនកិច្ច​របស់​ព្រះអង្គម្ចាស់ Damrong របស់​ប្រទេស​ថៃ Rajanubhab ទៅ​ព្រះវិហារ​បរិសុទ្ធ​មុន​ពេល​ដែល​សេចក្តី​សម្រេច​នេះ​។
សម្ដេច​សីហ​នុ​បាន​ធ្វើការ​តវ៉ា​នៅ​លើ​បញ្ហា​នេះ​ជាច្រើន​ដង​នៅ​ក្នុង 1967,1968 និង​ឆ្នាំ 1969 ហើយ​គាត់​មិន​បាន​ដើរ​ឆ្លង​កាត់​របង​នោះ​ទេ​ព្រោះ​លោក​មិន​ចង់​បង្កើត​បញ្ហា​ជាមួយ​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​។

Anonymous said...

The Court must have seen enough merit in Cambodia's lawsuit to have granted both parties to present their complaints. If not so, it would have been a waste of time to reopen this historical case.

Cambodia sought [is seeking] the Court's clarification of its 1962 verdict, particularly, the definition of 'vicinity' which the Thais are now claiming is ill-defined.

The Court is not being asked to change its 1962 verdict; merely to make things clearer to both sides, particularly, to Thailand, who is following its own unilateral maps instead of the maps [Annex 1] applied and recognised by the Court in 1962, and also for several years, by Thai authorities themselves.

In short, the on-going hearings reflect the Court's judgement or sentiment that it bears the legal duty to do the best it can to spell things out to both sides in both technical and legal terms.

This is only my understanding as a lay and non-legal observer.

-Kouprey


Anonymous said...

Agreed, we should honored ALL Cambodia's Team to the ICJ but just these three passionated, justices, honorable, experts legal counsels. We MUST waited for the ICJ interpretations late this year ( DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAVE TO WAIT THIS LONG EVIDENCES ARE ALREADY THERE).

To safeguard our border well against these thieving neighbors WE MUST TRAIN OUR BORDER GUARDS WELL WHERE THE REAL BORDERS LINES ARE. WE MUST GIVE THEM A CLEAR GUIDELINES TO DO THEIR JOBS. GOVERNMENT & OUR POPULATIONS MUST BE FULLY BACK UP OUR TROOPS FOR LEGAL ACTIONS THEY TAKE.

WE MUST ARMED OUR TROOPS WELL SUCH AS SAM SYSTEMS, BEST SNIPER RIFLES, 155MM LONG RANGE ARTILLERY SYSTEMS, BEST OBSERVATION EQUIPMENTS ( such as night vision, infared systems, GPS etc etc) A WELL BACK UP
REINFORCEMENTS TROOPS, UPGRADE OUR ARMORED DIVISIONS, PLACE MOTION SENSORS ALL AROUND AREAS
THAT WE CAN'T GUARD, BARBED WIRED
AROUND SENSITIVE AREAS. ABOVE ALL TREATED SIAM WITH RUTELSS FORCES WHEN THEY CROSSED UNTO OUR
TERRITORIES PURPOSELY.




THEY MUST BE RUTELESS BUT YET NOT COMMITED WAR CRIMES.