The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan has asked for a temporary restraining order on the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which is sending hundreds of Iraqi Christians back to a country where, many contend, they are in serious danger of being tortured or killed. The civil liberties organization filed a brief in a federal court in Michigan Thursday, days after ICE arrested a number of Chaldean Christians in and around Detroit as part of President Donald J. Trump’s efforts to enforce immigration laws. Church and civic leaders in the Iraqi Christian community have been calling for leniency, and some of them have been pointing out the irony that they supported Trump for president on the grounds that he promised to protect Christians in the Middle East. On Friday, advocates will gather at the Patrick V. McNamara Federal Building in Detroit for a rally in support of the immigrants at risk of deportation. Organizers expect two members of Congress – Sander Levin (D-MI) and Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) – to be among those present. “Ronald Reagan didn’t deport them, Bill Clinton didn’t deport them, George Bush, Obama, none of them, because the country’s condition, whether it was Saddam Hussein or what happened more recently,” Martin Manna, president of the Chaldean Community Foundation outside Detroit, said in an interview Thursday. “Things have worsened in Iraq; they haven’t gotten better for Christians and other minorities, and the US can take a lot of blame for this. They’re the ones who invaded, created the chaos, including the displacement or more than 1.1 million Christians.” The ACLU said in its brief that the Iraqi nationals who are being deported, many of whom have lived for decades in the United States, face a “very real probability of persecution, torture or death” if they are sent back to Iraq at this time. “Although most were ordered removed to Iraq years ago (some for overstaying visas, others based on criminal convictions for which they long ago completed any sentences), the government released them under orders of supervision,” the brief says. “Thus, until recently, Petitioners were living peaceably in the community, reporting regularly to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), and complying with their other conditions of release.” Then, on Sunday, “with no warning, ICE began arresting and detaining Petitioners on the grounds that Iraq has now agreed to take them back. ICE then transferred most of them to a detention center in Youngstown, Ohio, far from their families and their retained counsel.” Joseph Kassab, founder and president of the Iraqi Christians Advocacy and Empowerment Institute in West Bloomfield, Mich., explained in an interview that Trump’s list of seven Muslim-majority nations from which immigrants would be barred entry to the United States originally included Iraq. He agreed to remove that country from the list when Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, on March 21 visit to the White House, agreed to reverse a seven-year policy of not issuing travel documents to Iraqi-Americans. That opened the door to Iraq being able to receive deportees from the U.S. But the ACLU lawsuit argues that potential deportees should be afforded a chance to determine whether “changed count ry conditions” pose a threat that would give them a right to protection. And Iraq is listed on the U.S. State Department’s Travel Advisory as a country which U.S. citizens should avoid because it is too dangerous. If it’s unsafe for U.S. citizens, it’s also unsafe for Iraqis who grew up here, many of whom do not speak Arabic and have American mannerisms, advocates argue. “They will be looked at as being foreigners and westerners and therefore the [Islamist] militias have the right to kidnap them and kill them because that’s what Sharia law calls for,” Kassab said. “In other words they’d be considered as people who might be spies for the Western world, like the United States.” That is what Nahidh Shaou fears. The 55-year-old Chaldean from Detroit served in the US Army in the early 1980s, but suffered from PTSD and was honorably discharged. Soon after, according to Christianity Today, at the age of 20, he shot and wounded a police officer during a robbery near Detroit and was sentenced to 35 years in prison. He finished his sentence last fall, but was immediately detained by ICE and scheduled to be deported in April. “He’ll be targeted for his Christian faith, his Chaldean ethnicity, his veteran status—that will be seen as traitorous,” said Tiara Shaya, Shaou’s niece. A last-minute ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals granted Shaou’s lawyer a chance to argue that his client should not be returned to Iraq because of the risks of persecution, Foreign Policy reported. That’s the kind of chance those represented by the ACLU are hoping for. “U.S. law prohibits the removal of individuals to countries where they would face a likelihood of persecution or torture,” the Union’s brief says. “Yet despite the clear danger that many of these individuals face in Iraq, ICE is attempting to deport them based on outstanding removal orders that do not take account of intervening changed circumstances which should entitle them to protection. For example, many of the Petitioners are Chaldean Christians, who are widely recognized as targets of brutal persecution in Iraq.” Last year, the US State Department recognized that Christians in Iraq and Syria are being subjected to a “genocide” carried out by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The ACLU petition is a class action suit that would affect more than 100 people, but it focuses on seven petitioners. All of them have criminal records—and thus would be eligible for deportation—but all served their sentences, and some of the crimes are relatively minor. Most of the petitioners, according to the brief, fear being sent to Iraq because of their faith—in most cases Christian, but in two cases because they are Shi’ite Muslims (ISIS is a Sunni movement). One of the petitioners has a visible sign that he is a Christian: a tattoo of a cross. In addition, he has the same name as his father, who was a general in the Iraqi army. Noting that most of the detainees are Christian, the ACLU pointed out that in 2015, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “status as a Christian alone entitles [a non- immigrant alien] to withholding of removal, given that there is ‘a clear probability’ that he would be subject to future persecution if returned to contemporary Iraq.” The Union added: “And conditions for Christians have gotten even worse in the subsequent two years.” In a statement earlier this week, Bishop Francis Kalabat said that the Chaldean Church based in Detroit has been working with “many agencies to try to stop this bleeding,” including the State Department and members of Congress. The bishop was unavailable for an interview this week, but a spokeswoman said, “We’re just offering Masses and Holy Hours at all our churches.” ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Aleteia

The trial of 17 Turkish journalists accused of complicity in a coup attempt in July 2016 will open in Istanbul on 19 June. Six of them, including Ahmet Altan, Mehmet Altan and Nazlı Ilıcak, are currently detained. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) calls for their immediate release because they are being held for criticizing the government. According to a 247-page indictment, the 17 reporters and columnists are each facing the possibility of three life sentences plus a 15-year jail term on a range of charges that include trying to “eliminate the government,” trying to “destroy constitutional order” and trying to “eliminate parliament They are also charged with membership of “the FETÖ organization,” the government’s name for the movement led by the US-based Turkish cleric Fethullah Gülen that is alleged to have orchestrated the coup attempt. The prosecutor’s office claims that they had advanced warning of the coup and used “subliminal messages” to support it during a broadcast of “Özgür Düsünce” (Free Thought), a programme on the local TV channel Can Erzincan. “This trial marks a new level in the growing absurdity of the charges being brought against journalists,” RSF said. “We call for the acquittal of these 17 journalists and the immediate release of those being held, who have no place being in prison. It is high time that the Turkish authorities ended their systematic criminalization of critics.” The journalist going on trial on 19 June include such leading media names as Nazlı Ilıcak et Ahmet Altan, who is being prosecuted along with his brother, Mehmet Altan. The former editor of the newspaper Taraf, Ahmet Altan is accused inter alia of trying to “pave the way for the coup” by publishing two editorials headlined “Mutlak korku” (Absolute fear) and “Ezip geçmek” (Crush everything in your path) on 12 May 2016 and 27 June 2016 respectively. Together with the well-known Parisian street artist C215, RSF staged an operation in support of Turkey’s imprisoned journalist last month in which stencils were used to paint the faces of ten of the imprisoned journalists across the urban landscape in Paris and outside the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Ilıcak, the Altan brothers and around 20 other detained Turkish journalists have asked the Strasbourg court to rule on the legality of their detention, which has so far continued for an average of about ten months. At a hearing on 13 June, the court ruled that their cases were admissible and asked Turkey to submit its observations by 4 October. Ranked 155th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2017 World Press Freedom Index, Turkey is now the world’s biggest prison for professional journalists. The already worrying situation of its media has become critical under the state of emergency proclaimed after the 2016 coup attempt. Around 150 media have been closed by decree and more than 100 journalists are currently detained. At least 775 press cards have also been rescinded and hundreds of journalists’ passports have cancelled without any form of judicial proceedings. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Reporters Without Boarders

Myanmar’s army today cleared itself of allegations that troops may have carried out ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims, but said a soldier had been jailed for taking a motorbike. More than 70,000 members of the persecuted minority fled to neighbouring Bangladesh after the military launched a widespread crackdown late last year in the north of Rakhine state to hunt down insurgents who attacked police border posts. UN investigators who interviewed hundreds of escapees documented reports of mass killings, widespread rapes and horrifying accounts of babies being thrown into burning houses. In a report released in February they said security forces may have committed atrocities so severe they amount to crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. But on Tuesday the military said the results of its own investigation, led by army chief Aye Win, showed those charges were “false and fabricated”. “Out of 18 accusations included in the OHCHR report, 12 were found to be incorrect, with (the) remaining six accusations found to be false and fabricated accusations based on lies and invented statements,” said a report by the army’s ‘True News’ team carried in state media, using the abbreviation for the UN’s rights body. One member of the security forces was, however, sentenced to a year in jail and fined for taking a motorbike without the knowledge of its owner, the statement said. A village head and several villagers were also whipped and two people sent to prison for failing to help put out a fire. Both the military and the civilian government led by Nobel peace prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi have denied allegations of widespread atrocities against the Rohingya and refused to allow in a UN fact-finding mission to investigate. Instead the government, police and military have launched their own probes into the violence. These have been roundly criticised by rights groups as biased and lacking credibility. The army said its investigators had interviewed 2,875 people from 29 villages, but did not say whether they were ethnic Rakhines or the Rohingya Muslims who make up the majority in northern Rakhine. The Rohingya, stripped of citizenship by Myanmar’s then-military leaders in 1982, are loathed by many in the Buddhist-majority country, who claim they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and refer to them as “Bengalis”. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 The Indian Express

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) condemns the 25-year jail term that an opposition parliamentarian has received for leaking a highly sensitive video to the opposition newspaper Cumhuriyet and calls for the acquittal of the two Cumhuriyet journalists who are also being prosecuted in connection with the video. The parliamentarian, Enis Berberoğlu of the Republican People’s Party (CHP), was detained at the end of his trial at the main Istanbul law courts on June 14 after being convicted of spying and sentenced for leaking a video filmed in January 2014 by Turkish police who tried to intercept a convoy of trucks carrying arms to Jihadi rebels in Syria. The video was used as the basis of a Cumhuriyet story in May 2015 that caused a sensation because it implicated Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization (MİT) in the shipment and discredited the government’s claims that the trucks were carrying humanitarian aid. After President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan branded the leak as a “plot” against his government, charges of divulging state secrets, supporting a terrorist organization and spying were brought against Cumhuriyet’s then editor, Can Dündar, and its Ankara bureau chief, Erdem Gül. Their case, which ended up being separated from Berberoğlu’s, was also examined by the Istanbul court on June 14, but their trial was adjourned. Dündar, who now lives in exile in Germany, has condemned this week’s developments. “The justice palace is under the presidential palace’s complete control,” he told RSF. “I continue to defend my decision to publish, to defend the truth. We are not the ones who should be tried. It is President Erdoğan and the intelligence services who should be on trial.” RSF condemns the disproportionate sentence imposed on Berberoğlu, which has all the hallmarks of an act of political revenge by the Turkish authorities, and urges them to drop the charges against Dündar and Gül. “The charge of supporting a terrorist organization is not only completely unfounded but also speaks to the continuing criminalization of journalism in Turkey,” RSF said. Turkey is ranked 155 out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2017 World Press Freedom Index. The situation of its media was already worrying but has become critical under the state of emergency proclaimed after the July 2016 coup attempt. Around 150 media outlets have been closed, more than 100 journalists are currently in prison and more than 775 press cards have been rescinded. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Reporters Without Borders

Since beginning a large-scale offensive campaign on 6 June, the US-led coalition has continued to advance in Raqqa, the de facto capital of the Islamic State (ISIL) in Syria. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a network of Kurdish and Arab militias supported by the US-led coalition, has said they have opened up a second front inside the city. The recent offensive comes after a months-long effort by the SDF to cut off Raqqa, and ISIL within it, from outside support. However, despite the seeming success at loosening ISIL’s grasp on Raqqa, the number of civilian casualties has continued to increase as the US-led coalition’s attacks have intensified there. Paulo Pinheiro, chairman of the UN Commission of Inquiry, told the UN Human Rights Council on Wednesday that US-led coalition airstrikes are responsible for a “staggering loss of civilian life” in Raqqa, having caused at least 300 civilian casualties and the displacement of 160,000 since March. If the coalition’s offensive on Raqqa succeeds, it could liberate the city’s civilians, including Yazidi women and girls, that “the group has kept sexually enslaved for almost three years as part of an ongoing and unaddressed genocide" according to Pinheiro. However, he added that the fight on terrorism must not be “undertaken at the expense of civilians." Additionally, Pinheiro reported on efforts coordinated between the Syrian government and armed groups to evacuate civilians from conflict areas, which he asserts can "in some cases amount to war crimes” as forces have forcibly removed civilians. Civilians also continue to face a direct risk from ISIL, as those who have successfully fledfrom Raqqa have reported that ISIL fighters have begun killing any who try to escape, and fighters have been using civilians as human shields. The conflict situation has indirect consequences for civilians, as well. On Tuesday, 13 June, the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) called for better access to Raqqa, claiming that close to half a million people are in need of humanitarian assistance. UNHCR spokesman Andrej Mahecic cited several barriers that have made aid operations "costly and complex," such as a serious lack of resources and funding, as well as the blockage of land routes by other parties which has forced the aid agency to rely solely on airlifts. ICRtoP member Human Rights Watch has urged the US to investigate airstrikes that have allegedly targeted civilians in Syria and Iraq, expressing particular concerns about the alleged use of white phosphorus by coalition forces in airstrikes, saying it “poses a high risk of horrific and long-lasting harm” for civilians in densely populated cities like Raqqa. HRW added that "White phosphorus fragments can exacerbate wounds even after treatment and can enter the bloodstream and cause multiple organ failure”. In this vein, HRW has urged the US-led coalition to make protection of civilians a priority. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 RtoP Weekly

Register for Events :http://hrwf.eu/our-events/upcoming/ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Human Rights Without Boarders

At 9 a.m. on June 13, 2017, Judge Nil Nonn, President of the Trial Chamber, opened the proceedings for the hearing of closing arguments in Case 002/02. He called on the Greffier, who confirmed that all parties were present. Judge Nonn reminded the public of the schedule for closing arguments. He noted the timely filing of closing briefs by all parties. The schedule for the hearing of closing arguments will be as follows: Civil Parties will have one day to present; Co-Prosecutors will have two days to present; Nuon Chea will have two days to present; Khieu Samphan will have one and a half days to present; One day is reserved for rebuttal by Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers and the Co-Prosecutors; and Final rebuttal and the final statements of Accused, 4 hours, on June 23. Judge Nonn stated that after the hearings on final arguments conclude, the Chamber will close the proceedings and they will notify the public of the date of judgment at the appropriate time. Next, Judge Nonn reminded the parties to speak clearly and slowly for the translators. He also stated that he had instructed guards to bring accused Nuon Chea to the courtroom, according to recommendations made by the doctor at the ECCC who provided a certificate to the Chamber this morning. According to the doctor, Nuon Chea is physically able to sit in the courtroom for about 20 minutes. Judge Nonn informed Nuon Chea that after this period, if he feels that he cannot stay in the courtroom, upon request to the Chamber, he may return to a room downstairs. This request was made approximately 25 minutes into the hearing, and Nuon Chea moved to a room where he could participate in the proceedings remotely. Judge Nonn reminded the parties to adhere to the guidelines issued on June 7, 2017 (see document E457/7). Judge Nonn read the guidelines in full in open court. The guidelines are intended to help closing arguments go smoothly, with one guideline of particular note, regarding how parties are to address torture-tainted statements within the closing arguments. Judge Nonn stated that under the Cambodia Code of Criminal Procedure, coerced statements have no evidentiary value, and under the Convention against Torture, statements made as a result of torture may only be used against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made. Moreover, this Chamber has held that torture-tainted evidence cannot be used for the truth of the content stated, but objective information contained within the confessions and annotations made by an interrogator or his superiors can be used. He also recalled this Chamber’s findings related to the “real risk” that torture was used at S-21 and other security centers to obtain confessions, and that any party seeking to rely on this evidence should first show that the statement was not torture-tainted. Because the Accused in this case are charged with the crime of torture, the Chamber must apply a higher standard of proof to determine whether torture occurred. The Chamber’s previous determination that a real risk that evidence obtained by torture may differ from its final conclusion. Lastly, Judge Nonn read from the guidelines that as the evidentiary hearings have concluded and there is no danger that witnesses and civil parties could be improperly influenced by torture-tainted evidence, where necessary the Chamber will allow the parties to reference such information during closing statements, so long as the party indicates that the Chamber has attached a presumption that the evidence to be discussed was obtained by torture. Judge Nonn gave the floor to Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang. Mr. Ang introduced himself and stated that this was a good day to present closing statements and reparation proposals, after the close of evidentiary hearings of more than 200 days. He explained that the Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers represent a consolidated group of civil parties of 3,867 persons, and discussed the composition of this group. Of these, 2195 live in Phnom Penh and surrounding provinces, and the remainder outside Phnom Penh. He noted that the total number of civil parties has not been constant as 181 parties have passed away since the start of the trial, and from these, 34 claims have continued through the filing of a successor claim. Mr. Ang noted that 64 civil parties testified during trial, ten of these were only 16 years old during time of the Khmer Rouge, and those who testified included “new” and “base” people, and sixteen where Khmer Rouge at the time. Mr. Ang noted that, as stipulated in Internal Rule 23 quinquies, the civil parties filed their complaint against the Accused in support of the Co-Prosecutors and for moral and collective reparations. Mr. Ang also stated that in closing arguments, the Civil Party Co-Lawyers will provide highlights of testimony before this Chamber, so as to assist the Chamber to see elements of crimes, and to highlight the harms suffered by civil parties. He laid out the order of presentations. First, Mr. Ang will discuss the testimony relating to worksites and the persecution of the Cham people. Civil Party Co-Lawyer Chet Anly will present information related to the Tram Kok cooperative, the persecution of Buddhists, and the Kraing Ta Chan security center. Civil Party Co-Lawyer Hong Kim Suon will present on three security centers and internal purges. Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Marie Guiraud will present the treatment of the Vietnamese during the Democratic Kampuchea period, and on forced marriage. In the final session of today’s proceedings, Ms. Guiraud and Mr. Ang will cover reparations where funds have been secured for implementation. Mr. Ang requested that the Chamber allow the Civil Party Co-Lawyers to present video clips and projections of documents during the presentations. Judge Nonn granted the request, but only for those materials previously put before the Chamber. Mr. Ang agreed. Mr. Ang stated that the goal of the cooperatives was to provide food for internal consumption and for export. This was to be accomplished by rapidly increasing agricultural output to three tons of rice per hectare, creating a country-wide irrigation network, and building infrastructure such as airfields or dams. It is alleged that another objective for the cooperative was to further the policy of detecting, defending against, and smashing the enemy, and to eliminate the private sphere while destroying the social structure and replacing it with a collective regime that disallowed any individual interests. Mr. Ang explained that first the Chamber will need to determine whether crimes against humanity occurred at each of the worksites and cooperatives. Second, the Chamber will need to determine whether the Accused can be held responsible for those crimes. The aim of today’s presentations will be to show how civil party evidence supports the elements of the individual crimes alleged, specifically, enslavement, torture, and political persecution. Mr. Ang presented civil party evidence related to the Trapeang Thma Dam, 1st January Dam, and the Kampong Chhnang Airport. Civil parties described the conditions they endured, such as overwork, high quotas, inadequate nutrition, and lack of healthcare and hygiene. Their testimony is relevant to the crimes of enslavement, other inhumane acts, murder, extermination, and persecution on political grounds against “new” people. Their testimony covers, in great deal, their living and working conditions. Mr. Ang stated that each worksite had different characteristics: for example, at Trapeang Thma Dam, each person described being attached to 100-person units and the control that was exerted over them. At the January 1st Dam, each of the civil parties described in detail the living conditions and lack of sanitation at a worksite that covered three sectors. At the Kampong Chhnang Airport, civil parties described grueling labor while being under “total instruction.” With regards to the Trapeang Thma Dam, 101 civil parties were admitted in the context of the crimes committed there. Of these, four civil parties testified on the crimes of enslavement, murder, extermination, and persecution on political grounds against the “new” people at the worksite. Mr. Ang noted that the Chamber will have to decide if the conditions at the Trapeang Thma Dam meet the standard for enslavement, and this will include an analysis of the control of speech, family, the supervising of people, and imposition of punishment. Mr. Ang’s presentation of civil party testimony on Trapeang Thma Dam included statements on the difficulty of daily life and meeting work quotas, the meetings held by superiors, and the ways in which “new” people were discriminated against by the “base” people. Mr. Ang stated that for the 1st January Dam, 47 civil parties were admitted in the context of the crimes committed there. Five of these civil parties testified on crimes of enslavement, other inhumane acts, murder, extermination, and persecution on political grounds against “new” people. The civil parties who testified on the conditions at the 1st January Dam were all women. Their statements included also descriptions of the discrimination of the “base” people against the “new” people, the lack of autonomy, medicine, and hygiene, the particular suffering of women as they did not receive bras, underwear, or feminine hygiene products with which to manage their menstruation, the control of workers through reeducation meetings, the restriction on speaking to anyone, including one’s siblings, and the fear of showing grief for family members who were killed. Eleven civil parties were admitted in the context of the crimes committed at Kampong Chhnang Airport, and three of those testified on crimes of enslavement and other inhumane acts. Their statements included descriptions on their restriction of moment and on communication with others, the strict regulations, and the ways that they were encouraged to report on one another. Mr. Ang noted that throughout the trial, civil parties were allowed to ask questions of the Accused, and 51civil parties have asked questions of Accused through the president. The Accused have decided to exercise their right to be silent. Next, Mr. Ang yielded the floor to Civil Party Co-Lawyer Chet Vanly. Ms. Vanly stated that after the forced evacuation of cities and towns in April 1975, the Cambodian population was sent to work in rural areas, where people were organized in cooperatives where they had to work, regardless of age, status, or previous job. The workers had to follow Angkar policies, and as a result of such policies, millions of Cambodians became slaves and were forced labor. And the harm they suffered then continues today. She stated that the crimes committed during the Khmer Rouge regime did not just happen, rather, they were committed as part of a common plan which included Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan. Ms. Vanly reviewed the civil party testimony on the Tram Kok cooperatives, which included 77 communes. The conditions of the people living there was that they were subject to arrest and detention. This includes the working and living conditions of people who were sent there, the identification of people as enemies, the reeducation, and the arrest or disappearance of people for various offenses. 52 civil parties were admitted related to the crimes committed at the Tram Kok cooperatives, of these, eleven testified. Three civil parties provided evidence linking the Accused to the Tram Kok cooperatives. They also described loss of private property on transfer to the cooperatives, having to eat and sleep communally, and the killing of their family members. Five civil parties testified about the working and living conditions they experienced and harm they suffered as children or adolescents during that time. Two civil parties testified about their transfers to Tram Kok and working long hours without sufficient food or medical care. One civil party described his arrest and detention. One civil party testified on cruel treatment and abuse she endured. Ms. Vanly stated that the abuse of power in Tram Kok led to the crimes of enslavement and all the other crimes that happened there. To find that there was enslavement, the Chamber will need to characterize the degree of control that the CPK exercised over its population, including psychological control, such as fostering climate of fear, control of over labor, and control of speech, life, and sexuality. She stated that a climate of fear was created through the use of reeducation meetings, the supervision of “new” people by “base” people, and imposition of punishments for deviations from the newly imposed structure. Ms. Vanly noted that the Chamber will also need to determine if inadequate medical care, lack of food and amenities, and harsh living conditions amounts to the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts. Civil party evidence showed that poor quality medicines were used coupled with untrained medics, resulting in a walking disability in one civil party, and the death of another civil party’s 3-year old daughter. Ms. Vanly also noted that one of the most striking features of civil party evidence from Tram Kok was the disappearances of friends and family members. Ms. Vanly reminded the Chamber that disappearances can characterize other inhumane acts, but they can also characterize the climate of fear which is one of the indicia for enslavement. Ms. Vanly stated that other crimes committed at Tram Kok included torture and detention, and she presented civil party testimony describing a civil party’s arrest, beating, torture and detention. Another important issue at Tram Kok was the religious persecution against Buddhists. Ms. Vanly noted that the Chamber has heard testimony on how important Buddhism was in Cambodia before the DK regime. She presented civil party evidence on the destruction and repurposing of religious pagodas for sacrilegious purposes. Next, Ms. Vanly presented information on the Kraing Ta Chan Security Center. There was a main prison at Kraing Ta Chan, which was in the Tram Kok cooperative. She noted that this security center was not created accidentally, but that that incidents that happened there were indicative of the Khmer Rouge policies to destroy the enemies of the Khmer Rouge by way of the torture, killing and detention at the security center. Two civil parties testified about the events they experienced at this security center and four civil parties testified about their family members or friends who were taken to Kraing Ta Chan. Ms. Vanly stated that victims at Kraing Ta Chan were deprived of their rights and freedom, and they were deprived of their right to trial. She highlighted evidence from one civil party who had been detained for a month, and then released to work outside. The civil party testified that he was released because he was the youngest, and that if he told anyone he would be killed. He was released to tend buffalo, dig graves, carry dead prisoners outside, and bury them. He was instructed to grow coconuts on the graves. Ms. Vanly noted that this was not the first time that this Chamber determined the status of a prisoner who was then released to work outside the prison, as the Chamber had received this question regarding a prisoner who was allowed to work at S-21 in Case 001. The Chamber had characterized that prisoner’s experience as enslavement in that instance, and the Civil Part Co-Lawyers consider that a similar approach should be taken in this case. Ms. Vanly presented evidence from civil parties who witnessed beatings and torture at Kraing Ta Chan, especially that of “new” people, who did not last more than a month due to lack of food and poor treatment. Next, Ms. Vanly yielded the floor to her colleague, Civil Party Co-Lawyer Hong Kim Suon, who presented evidence on S-21 Security Center, Phnom Kraol Security Center, and Au Kanseng Security Centers. Mr. Suon noted that first the Chamber will need to determine whether the crimes of imprisonment, murder, enslavement, extermination, persecution, and other inhumane acts were committed at the security centers, and, second, to determine whether the Accused can be held responsible for those crimes. Mr. Suon reported that 296 civil parties were admitted on the basis for crimes alleged at security centers and execution sites. Two civil parties testified regarding the crimes committed at Phnom Kraol and Office K-11 in the Mondulkiri province. One of the civil parties was detained, interrogated, and tortured at Phnom Kraol and testified to the harm he suffered there, made more painful as he had served Angkar wholeheartedly, felt betrayed by Angkar when he was detained, and especially devastated when his parents were killed by the regime. Mr. Suon next covered the crimes committed at S-21, noting that this was not a repetition of the crimes committed in Case 001. Through analysis of new documents on the case file, the Civil Party Co-Lawyers found approximately 114 new civil parties who had relatives or friends detained in S-21, and that this will help the Chamber determine whether the crimes of imprisonment and extermination occurred at S-21. Ten civil parties testified to crimes at S-21 including Chum Mey, who was a direct victim. The other civil parties testified to the indirect harm they suffered as a result of their loved ones who were killed at S-21. Mr. Suon presented testimony from Mr. Mey on his torture, interrogation, and the loss of vision and hearing he has suffered as a result. Mr. Suon also explained Mr. Mey would not have confessed but for the pain he suffered at the hands of his interrogators, which was why Mr. Mey told them some things that were real and some that were false in his confession. Specifically, his references to the KGB and CIA were false, but Mr. Mey suffered so much that he said that he just gave them what they wanted. The remaining S-21 civil party testimony described how the civil party discovered that a family member or loved one had been detained and killed at S-21, his or her reaction upon the discovery, and the long-term suffering caused by the death of the loved one. Next, Mr. Suon presented evidence related to the internal purges in the East Zone. He noted that the Chamber is seized with the facts regarding the assistance and implementation of the policy to implement and defend the CPK revolution through the education of bad elements and killing of enemies, both inside and outside of party ranks, by whatever means necessary. This includes the internal purges of the East Zone, which allegedly started in 1976. Mr. Suon stated that 118 civil parties were admitted on the basis of the purges, and three civil parties, who were direct victims of the purges, described their experiences as former cadres and how they were harmed by the targeting of cadres and soldiers from the East Zone. Each civil party testified regarding the deep sense of betrayal and shock he felt because of the purges of the East Zone as contrasted with his prior allegiance to the regime. The living conditions of the cadres before the purges was described as difficult, with long hours and insufficient food and water. One civil party, who has a permanently disabled hand as a result of his arrest during the purges, asked the Accused who is responsible for his disability and the difficulty he continues to have to make a living. Despite the morning session being a long and intense review of civil party testimony, Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang requested an extra 15 minutes, which Judge Nonn granted at the end of Mr. Suon’s presentation, before the lunch break. Mr. Ang began his discussion of the treatment of the Cham. He noted that the Office of the Co-Investigating Judges admitted 46 civil parties and Pre-Trial Chamber had admitted an additional 95 civil parties related to the treatment of the Cham. Out of that number, six Cham civil parties testified during the hearings. The civil parties gave evidence on the targeting of mosques, the destruction of the Koran, the prevention of Cham from praying, how people’s hair was cut against their wishes, women prevented from wearing head scarves, and people were told to eat pork. Everything related to practice of religion was prohibited, and how at least one person who refused to abandon his religion by eating pork was starved. In October 1975, the Cham rebelled against the RAK, and the civil parties testified to the murder, torture, imprisonment, and disappearances of the Cham before and after the rebellion. Mr. Ang described the testimony of one civil party, who fought in the rebellion with a machete against the Khmer Rouge, but who said that many more Cham died than Khmer Rouge, as the RAK forces had much better weapons. After the rebellion, the Cham were forced to evacuate their villages by boats, with orders not to return to their native village. These civil parties described being transferred multiple times, given insufficient food rations, and were separated from their families. One civil party was taken to the pit at Wat Au Trakuon, where people were being killed. He hid and could hear the screaming of the people and believed that his mother and elder siblings were some of those who were screaming. These civil parties survived by escaping or lying about whether they were Cham or Khmer. At 1:30 p.m., Judge Nonn reconvened the hearing after the lunch break and gave the floor to the Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang. Mr. Ang continued the presentation on the persecution of the Cham. He stated that each civil party testified to the harm that they suffered, including the grief from the deaths of their family members, their loss at not being able to practice their religion. Most civil parties testified to the immediate physical harm of not having enough food, being forced to work, the fear that came from witnessing others suffer around them. They also testified to the material harm they suffered. They described how their livelihoods and long-term prospects were reduced because they lost their family’s property or had their education prospects reduced. Mr. Ang showed a video of one civil party who asked the following question of the Accused, “Why were all religions abolished, including my Islamic religion? We Cham people were persecuted on a permanent basis during that time. All Cham people living in Kampuchea wanted to live peacefully, ask my people at the time, but instead they lived with great suffering”. Mr. Ang yielded the floor to Ms. Guiraud with the president’s approval. Ms. Guiraud addressed the court and dedicated the session to speak about the treatment of the Vietnamese and the regulation of marriage, and said she would conclude with a discussion of the probative value of civil party testimony. Ms. Guiraud stated that the Chamber is seized with a closing order that the Vietnamese constituted a national, ethnic, and religious group. The Chamber is also seized of facts related to the eviction of people of Vietnamese origin in 1975 and 1976, and targeted murders of Vietnamese civilians. In this context of these targeted murders, the Chamber will have to determine whether these murders were committed on the basis of matrilineal descendance. Ms. Guiraud noted that in total, 73 civil parties were admitted on the basis of the harm they suffered linked to the treatment of the Vietnamese. Seven civil parties testified before the court. Only one civil party of Vietnamese origin came to testify before this court, the other six civil parties are ethnic Khmer who testified on behalf of their family or neighbors of Vietnamese origin. She reviewed the names and highlights of the civil parties who testified on Vietnamese treatment, and stated that she would highlight the testimony supporting the crime of deportation and the crime of genocide through the commission of murder. Ms. Guiraud said that the testimony of these civil parties has led the Civil Party Co-Lawyers to establish that all of the ethnic Vietnamese who lived in Pou Chentam in 1977 were taken away and never seen again. Ms. Guiraud presented civil party testimony about the questioning of people on their ethnicity and the “taking away” of those who were determined to be Vietnamese. She also presented testimony on the exchange of rice and salt offered from a Vietnamese ferry to Khmer Rouge ferry for Vietnamese passengers. Civil party testimony also described the disappearances of family members, including young children, and the suffering of the family left behind. One civil party’s father was Vietnamese, and after he witnessed the rape of two daughters of a Vietnamese major, he eventually killed himself in an attempt to protect his wife and family from the danger of being related to him. Ms. Guiraud presented evidence from four civil parties who described how the Khmer Rouge targeted Vietnamese mothers and their children for execution, leaving the Khmer husband/father to live. The children of Vietnamese fathers and Khmer mothers were spared (though the Vietnamese father was not). She stated that this indicates the existence and implementation of the theory of matrilineal descendance. Next, Ms. Guiraud addressed the regulation of marriage. She stated that the Chamber is seised of the nationwide issue of forced marriage under the DK regime. 25 civil parties testified on the subject of the nationwide marriages during the trial. Twelve civil parties testified during the segment dedicated to marriages, and eight civil parties who were called to testify on other facts were also heard on their own marriages, and five testified on the marriages of their relatives. These twenty-five testimonies are analyzed in final brief. Marriages took place during the entire time of Democratic Kampuchea, and marriages took place in all zones of the Democratic Kampuchea, including three autonomous sectors. The men were generally around 25 years old; the women were around 20 years old. Before presenting testimony, Ms. Guiraud spoke on what she termed a “crucial legal issue.” She asked the Chamber, “Which crime are we speaking about, exactly? What are the elements that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt?” She said that if the possible criminalization of marriage is determined under the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts, then the Supreme Court Chamber clarified the elements of this crime in its appeal decision in Case 002/01. In that decision, the Supreme Court Chamber considered that it was anachronistic to qualify crimes in view of elements that were not yet crystallized in 1975. In simpler language, the Accused cannot be found guilty of a crime that did not exist legally at the time that they committed the acts that today would be considered criminal. Ms. Guiraud next reviewed the Supreme Court Chamber decision in detail. She stated that in the appeal decision, the Supreme Court Chamber applied this reasoning to the crime of forced population movement and forced disappearance, but Ms. Guiraud considers that this same reasoning applies to issue of marriages, before the Chamber today. To this end, Ms. Guiraud discussed the “road map” that the Supreme Court Chamber outlined in its decision. She stated that according to the Supreme Court Chamber, the first step is to articulate the notion of “other inhumane acts” around conduct. In Case 002/01, the first and second movements of the populations were what constituted conduct. In this case, the Civil Party Co-Lawyers are of the view that the conduct that the Chamber should analyze is the regulation of marriage, noting that this is conduct whose existence has not been challenged by any of the parties, including Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan. Ms. Guiraud stated that the second step is to carry out a holistic analysis of all the elements of the conduct in question. The Civil Party Co-Lawyers are of the view that as regards conduct related to the regulation of marriage, the different elements that the Chamber must analyze are: the entry into marriage, which includes the circumstances under which the decision to marry was taken, the possibility to refuse or not refuse to enter the marriage, the existence of punishment (physical abuse, rape, disappearances) for those who refuse to marry; the choice of the spouses, i.e., the ability of spouses of choosing their partner and the degree of control that Angkar had over the choice; the ceremony of the marriage, and the issue of whether the spouses were aware of the ceremony prior to the marriage, whether the spouses knew each other, whether families were present during the ceremony, what role Angkar played in the ceremony, whether commitments were made vis a vis Angkar, and whether or not it was possible to continue traditional wedding rites; the matrimonial relations following the ceremony, including the existence of conjugal visits, possible monitoring of couples to ensure consummation, possible threats related to the refusal to consummate the marriage, punishment for having refused to consummate the marriage, which could take the form of rape, and the consummation of the marriage as such; and the consequences of the marriage with regards to pregnancy and miscarriages. With these elements in mind, the Civil Party Co-Lawyers are of the opinion that the issue of the regulation of marriage is broader than just the consent to the marriage. Ms. Guiraud said that the third step will be for this Chamber to identify the rights and prohibitions that were in force in 1975 in legal texts that affected the conduct of the regulation of marriages. The Supreme Court Chamber gave the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 as an example. In this declaration, article 3 guarantees the right of all to freedom and safety of his or her person, article 5 states that no one should be subject to torture or punishment which involves cruel and inhumane or degrading treatment, article 12 states that no one shall be the victim of arbitrary interference in their private or public life, and article 16 provides that marriage can only be concluded with the full and free consent of the future spouses. The right to free and full consent to marriage includes the right to choose whether, when and who you marry. Ms. Guiraud noted that the fourth point in road map set out by the Supreme Court Chamber concerns the gravity of the breach. And to do so the Supreme Court Chamber invited the Trial Chamber to consider subsequent norms related to article 16 relating to the full and free consent to marriage. Ms. Guiraud mentioned various international conventions on human rights that adopted full and free consent to marriage, from the U.N. convention on human rights in 1966, to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women in 1979, and the Sisay case before the SCSL. This last point in road map is to determine whether the conduct caused major moral or physical suffering, caused serious bodily harm, or affected human dignity. Ms. Guiraud stated that with regard to the violation of physical integrity, which occurs when the consummation of marriage is imposed or when the punishment is imposed for failing to consummate the marriage, these are grave breaches. Ms. Guiraud next spoke about the distinction between arranged marriage and forced marriages. She noted that the Defense says the Angkar regulation of marriage were just arranged marriages in which Angkar assumed the role of the parents in arranging the marriage. And Defense says that if the Chamber finds that these are forced marriage, then the Chamber will be ruling against arranged marriages. But, Ms. Guiraud countered, in arranged marriages, the spouses still consent. And conversely, if in an arranged marriages one spouse does not consent, then this becomes a forced marriage. Ms. Guiraud next reviewed whether the spouses gave their full and free consent, and concluded that the evidence shows the contrary due to the relevant climate of fear, as it created a circumstance in which full and free consent would be impossible. Ms. Guiraud discussed civil party testimony that supported the existence of a climate of fear, and the inability of the spouses, both male and female, to refuse the marriage. Moreover, civil parties testified they were not informed of the date of marriage or who they were to marry ahead of time. The ceremony itself could contain instructions from Angkar to procreate, and civil parties testified of being raped by their husbands, who were sometimes driven by fear of the consequences of failing to consummate the marriage. All of the civil parties testified that they felt pressure to marry. Next, Ms. Guiraud discussed the probative value of civil party testimony. First, she reminded the court that civil party participation only exists because it is in accordance with the Cambodian penal procedure. She also highlighted the special nature of civil parties, in that they are persons who lived through the Khmer Rouge regime and suffered from the crimes committed then. Civil parties will therefore have a higher range of the experiences under the Khmer Rouge Second, Ms. Guiraud reminded the Chamber that civil parties are parties, just as the defendants are parties. And just as defendants do not take an oath when they come before the Chamber, neither do civil parties, and it is not because the civil parties do not wish to take an oath. She challenged Nuon Chea’s position that civil party testimony somehow has less weight because the parties did not take an oath. Third, Ms. Guiraud addressed the challenges of the passage of time between the events in question and the testimony given, asking “How can we assess the reliability or credibility of a civil party forty years after the fact and assess the role of collective memory and personal experience?” She reminded the Chamber that the same issues apply to all persons who have testified before the Chamber. In addition, Ms. Guiraud noted that the Chamber heard civil parties who are aged and often illiterate. They come from a generation where traditions prevailed and hierarchy is respected, and then they came into a court room and were questioned by judges in robes on a stage. She reminded the Chamber that international jurisprudence is homogenous in that details that are vague do not discredit the testimony provided. And with this in mind, Ms. Guiraud asked that when the Chamber consider the probative value of civil party testimony, it consider the testimony on a case-by-case base, and determine what is an essential detail (like the act of rape) and what is secondary (such as not remembering the names of cellmates in a culture where names are not as important as in the West), and also consider the cultural context of the civil party before it. Lastly, Ms. Guiraud noted that while the Defense has used the civil party applications extensively to test the reliability and credibility of civil parties, the applications were designed and used by different non-government organizations, they were not designed to be exhaustive, and they were filled out when the investigation details were not yet known or complete. The Civil Party Co-Lawyers decided to not use these documents to support their final brief. Ms. Guiraud then asked, if everyone agrees that these documents are not sufficiently reliable, how far can they be used by the Chamber to tarnish the reliability or credibility of the civil parties? Ms. Guiraud asked the Chamber to take the evidence provided by the civil parties and to acknowledge the harm suffered by the civil party collective by these crimes. She also reminded the Chamber that a sentence is often a form of reparation, to which the civil parties are entitled. The last completion plan from the ECCC indicated that the trial judgment would be issued in a year, and she stated that it was far too long. Court adjourned for the afternoon break, and proceedings started again at 3pm. Judge Nonn informed the parties in Case 002/02 that in the proceedings for the following days, Judge Claudia Fenz will not be sitting due to health reasons, and will be replaced by International Reserve Judge Martin Karopkin until such time that Judge Fenz can return. Ms. Guiraud began the last session of the day by devoting it to the second component of civil party participation, which is the question of moral and collective reparations. She noted that civil parties have shown extraordinary resilience, and have found their own means to overcome their suffering and move forward in life. Meanwhile, significant governmental and nongovernmental initiatives have been established for the victims of the Khmer Rouge, so it is with humility that the Civil Party Co-Lawyers approach the question of reparations. Ms. Guiraud spent about ten minutes discussing the consequence of a change in the language in the Internal Rules in 2010, specifically the rules which governs the source(s) of funding for civil party reparations. She said that while there have been many positive outcomes to the changes, there are two limitations that should be noted. The first limitation is the prohibition of the award of monetary compensation to the civil parties. Ms. Guiraud noted that where many civil parties live in abject poverty, a financial reparation could make a real difference in their lives. She also mentioned that there is a request before the Chamber that has been accepted into evidence, from about 100 civil parties who are interested in petitioning for financial reparations. Ms. Guiraud stated that the second limitation is that the rules were changed with the intention to allow civil parties to receive funding from third party sources for reparation projects, in the event that the Accused is indigent. The language chosen, however, was determined by this Chamber to provide two mutually exclusive paths for funding reparations projects: either the Accused pays for the reparation or a third party pays. In this way, it has limited the right of civil parties to hold the person who caused them harm accountable. Lastly, the Civil Party Co-Lawyers began the process of reparations before the judgment is final so as to expedite an already lengthy process. This meant that they had to propose reparations projects while reminding donors that the presumption of innocence must be respected, which means that the reparations has little to do with the Accused as they start before the finding of guilt of the accused, and are not paid for by Accused. The last limitation is the mode of funding. In Case 001, there was the establishment of a compensation fund which left the reparation projects subject to the requirements of the donors. There were at least two reparations projects (building stupas across the country and improving access to better healthcare) that were hugely supported by the civil parties which did not get implemented for lack of donor interest. Consequently, the Civil Party Co-Lawyers proposed only reparation project, which will be presented by Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang. Ms. Guiraud discussed the qualifications of the reparations projects to be presented today. She said they are a result of a permanent compromise between judicial and non-judicial reparations. First, the projects must first and foremost offer some benefits to the civil parties, and the Civil Party Co-Lawyers tried the best of their abilities and with assistance of the Victim Support Section to consult civil parties. The Co-Lawyers also invited partner NGOs to design projects. Ms. Guiraud said they made an effort to be as transparent as possible in closing arguments, and they have all the data on the consultations that were organized. Secondly, the projects are in line with the jurisprudence in Case 002/01. None of these limits undermine the quality of the projects. She stated that there are twelve projects are fully funded and partially or totally implemented that she is asking the Chamber to recognize. There are seven projects that have incomplete funding and she asked the Chamber for time until the end of November to finalize funding. The twelve projects presented by both Pich Ang and Ms. Guiraud comply with the principle of non-repetition, and are as follows: App for learning the history of the Khmer Rouge, developed in partnership with the Bophana Center, and is funded by the Rei Foundation and the EU. The contents, objectives, and benefits were developed with a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Education. That project was presented by 300+ civil parties in various forums. The target audience can use a table or smart phone to access the app, where there are written articles, audio films, testimonies of civil parties at the ECCC, and other Khmer Rouge documents included. Three teams work on the project – one team writes articles on Khmer Rouge history with validation from scientific committee; the second team is a film production team who interviewed survivors of Khmer Rouge, both civil parties and experts, then produced documentary films and video clips; and the third team is the technology team that is responsible for coding and development of app platform. The program records the stories of survivors to share with the next generation, so it is important to civil parties and survivors alike. The training of teachers on the Khmer Rouge in partnership with DC Cam, and fully funded by the EU. The Turtle Project, which is a play written by and performed by young Cambodians about acts of courage. It is developed with Meta House in association with Khmer Action Art with Youth for Peace. This was developed with a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Education and is to be performed in all schools in Cambodia. Civil parties attend dialogues at the schools after the play. It strengthens intergenerational dialogue, and the interaction between civil parties and younger generation is a way that civil parties identified to prevent future atrocities, and helps civil parties to speak with the children at schools. Entirely funded by EU and German institution. Cambodia German cultural association collaboration on Cham people and treatment during Democratic Kampuchea. Filmmakers developed Cham stories into two films, this project began implementation in 2016. “The Cham people and the Khmer Rouge” – this will be a multimedia package in Cham, Khmer and English. The documentary features several civil parties and involves their children in development and production of the project. It is fully funded through embassy of Switzerland in Bangkok and the Henry Bull Foundation. Phka Sla Krom Angkar Project in collaboration with Bophana Center and others. The proposal is for a classical dance production on the regulation of marriage during the Democratic Kampuchea. The project proposes community discussions and dialogue on how marriage was regulated during Democratic Kampuchea. Implementation began in 2016 is and expected to continue to 2018. Performances performed and scheduled in Phnom Penh, Battambang, and Kampot. The project gives platform for civil parties to tell their stories of marriage to the next generation, and will produce a performance as well. The project is intended to document the history of the victims, particularly those of forced marriage. Documents will be stored in a center and provide public access. It addresses issues like gender equality. Project fully funded by Swiss, German donors and USAID. Voices from Ethnic Minorities – in collaboration with Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers and the Victim Support Section. This project documents the experiences of Cham and ethnic Vietnamese and addresses the harm that they suffered within the scope of Case 002/02 by addressing stereotypes. In November 2016, the mobile exhibition launched. Project is fully funded by German donors and the embassy of Switzerland in Bangkok. “Satisfaction” – this is a truth-telling project, as the reparation includes the verification of facts and full and public disclosure of truths to victims. Civil parties have consistently requested that memorials be built and that they can share their experiences through truth telling activities. Unheard Stories of Civil Parties Participating at the ECCC – this is an illustrated book of what civil parties suffered in Case 002/02. The production completed in 2016, and it has given civil parties a forum for their store and allows relief through recognition of their suffering in forced marriages, the treatment of Buddhists and minorities, security centers, worksites, and cooperatives. 500 copies have been printed to distribute to education institutions. Funding by Henry Bull Foundation. A Time to Remember – this is a song-writing contest for Cambodian youth in collaboration with the Youth Resource Development Program. The project acknowledged experiences of survivors via intergenerational dialogue. Support from Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts. Final performance was in 2016 before an audience of about 400 people. Goal was to raise awareness among youth. Fully funded. Memory Sketches of Kraing Ta Chan – created an exhibition of memory sketches in consultation with civil parties. Launched in 2016 with representatives of youths, monks, and local authorities in attendance. Sketches from some students. Fully funded by international coalition of sites of conscience. Access to Judicial Records of Khmer Rouge Trials and Civil Party Materials – through documentation at the ECCC. Public events will be held to raise awareness of history, full list of civil parties in Case 002 will be displayed, documents and video will be available to public for free. Fully funded by Royal Government of Cambodia through national budget. The facility has already been built, funded by embassy of Japan. Rehabilitation – includes access to medical and psychological care – this is one of civil parties’ main concerns. As presented in part four of the final brief, civil parties have expressed this. The project is about healing and reconciliation for survivors of regime. Provide access to mental health, provide capacity development for staff. Self-help groups, testimonial therapy, and educate and provide assistance for survivors of torture, including Cham Muslims, and survivors of forced labor. Funding secured by USAID. Civic and Legal Education for Minorities: in collaboration with MIRO – minority rights organization. The purpose is to allow civil parties of Vietnamese origin to receive legal information with regard to their status. Financed and implemented. Ms. Guiraud thanked the Chamber for its attention; Judge Nonn thanked the Civil Party Co-Lawyers, and adjourned until tomorrow at 9am. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Cambodia Tribunal Monitor

Agenda item 4 Geneva, 15 June 2017 Distinguished Representatives, Ladies and Gentlemen, I thank you for the opportunity to once again allow me to address this Human Rights Council. This is the first time I am delivering a June oral update, and I will be covering some developments since March and will also look ahead to my next visit to the country which is scheduled to take place next month. I look forward to the Myanmar Government approving the dates, the length of my visit, and this time really provide access to the places I need to be in order to discharge my mandate appropriately. I would like to take the opportunity at the outset to express my deepest sympathies to those affected by Cyclone Mora. My prayers are with all those who have suffered losses including their homes. I also express my sadness at the recent crash of a military plane carrying military personnel and their families which killed 122 people, including over a dozen children. My heart goes out to their families and friends at this difficult time. Mr. President, Since my last address to you, the Fact-Finding Mission has been established by the Council. I welcome their mandate to look into alleged recent human rights violations by military and security forces, and abuses, in Myanmar. Establishing the truth in these alleged cases is in the interests of all of Myanmar and I therefore encourage the Government to fully cooperate with the Mission. Excellencies, In Shan and Kachin States, unacceptable reports of serious human rights violations allegedly committed by several parties to the conflict including the Tatmadaw and ethnic armed groups have continued to arise. I was particularly distressed to see an appalling 17-minute video posted on social media in May, apparently showing soldiers from the Myanmar army beating several bound and unarmed men. The incident apparently occurred in 2015 and the fate of those involved is still unknown. In another incident in Kachin State, three individuals were found dead, with their bodies reportedly showing signs of torture, a few days after supposedly being detained by the Tatmadaw. I note statements from the authorities that they will investigate both incidents. However, I am unaware of any investigations into another incident in November 2016, which I just learnt about, where 18 people from Nam Hkye Ho village in Shan State were reportedly detained by the army, and their burnt remains found in a grave a few weeks later. I have reported to you on a regular basis similar incidents, and I fear a recurring pattern here. The Tatmadaw, or some elements of it, conduct themselves in violation of human rights. Some of these cases are reported but cannot be verified for lack of access. A couple of these cases get out, often because they had been caught on tape and circulated. The authorities say they will investigate, and we, the international community, accept this as an adequate response and let it go. Until the next case comes out again into the public realm, and the cycle of events repeats itself. I must remind that investigations must be conducted into all allegations, not just those that are extensively picked up by the media. And I must also remind that all investigations must be carried out in line with international standards and with all perpetrators fully held to account. I will be following progress in the cases that I have highlighted and others closely in the coming months. Friends and Colleagues, Sadly, the continuing conflict in Kachin, Shan and Chin States has caused more people to flee. Despite repeated requests from the United Nations agencies and their partners, and clear humanitarian needs, permission to travel to areas not under government control to assist those newly displaced has still not been granted. I am particularly concerned by recent reports that 1,500 civilians in Kachin State, who were instructed by the Tatmadaw to flee their homes, are stranded unable to travel further as the armed forces have blocked waterways normally used for transportation. Clearly, sustainable peace and demilitarization are sorely needed across the country. I note that the most recent union peace conference was held from 24 to 29 May, which was attended by eight ethnic armed groups with seven others attending parts of the conference as special guests and some other groups choosing not to attend at all. I welcome the inclusion of a number of human rights issues in the 37 general points that were agreed on by all participants. I was also pleased to see an increase in the representation of women in this conference, and hope that renewed effort can be taken to ensure that the minimum 30% target of female participation is achieved across all delegations and the full inclusion of civil society organizations and young people in the process. Ladies and Gentlemen, I welcome the release of a number of those imprisoned for simply exercising their rights in the amnesties of prisoners announced on 12 April and 24 May. This includes Hla Phone and Myo Yan Naung Thein whom I visited in prison in January. I note however that many such individuals still remain in jails, awaiting trial or serving sentences, including human rights defender Khaine Myo Tun, whom I visited in January and who also suffers from health conditions. The increasing use of the vaguely worded defamation provision in section 66 (d) of the Telecommunications Act is particularly worrying. It is especially notable that each case has to be approved by the Ministry of Communications and Transport in order to be charged, and that an estimate of 66 cases have been reported since the new government came to power. Discussing issues of public interest, satirising the military or the President should not risk criminal charges with a maximum three-year sentence. Mr. President, In my forthcoming visit to Myanmar in July, I will continue to look into business and human rights issues, including the rights of those affected by Special Economic Zones. Investment projects should translate into a positive transformation, and more must be done to ensure this is the case for all and to uphold the rights of local communities. I am particularly concerned by the developments at Letpadaung copper mine where police fired rubber bullets at community members protesting an incident in March during which a truck hit a local villager. Ten villagers and six police officers were injured and 50 individuals were later charged with offences in relation to the protests. There also continue to be protests in various areas over land confiscations, including the case of ten farmers who were convicted in April in Shan State to 16 months in prison for refusing to vacate land which had been confiscated from them. I congratulate Myanmar on its achievement of becoming a medium ranked country in the human development index. I encourage further efforts to improve access to education and life expectancy which form part of the indicators. This must include further tackling child labour. Another shocking case of child abuse has recently come to light of a girl who was working as a domestic servant and I call on the government to do more to protect all children, including those forced to work, from abuse and neglect. Distinguished Representatives, There have been a number of alarming incidents of incitement of intercommunal tension and religious violence since my last update. In April, extremist Buddhist nationalists reportedly pressured authorities to close two Islamic schools in Yangon that traditionally have served as a prayer site, with no consultation and investigation. That they remain closed through Ramadan, a sacred month for Muslims when they not only observe the fasting but are also encouraged to conduct additional prayers, has resulted in a sense of greater isolation amongst the community. Three individuals peacefully protesting the schools’ closure through prayer outside the schools reportedly now face charges. These undue restrictions are in contravention of the Muslim community’s basic right to religious freedom and right to manifest it through worship and observance. I commend the Government’s actions in pursuing the arrest of individuals involved in the Mingalar Taung Nyunt incident in Yangon where a mob of over a hundred Buddhist nationalists entered a Muslim home under the pretext of finding illegal residents, which later resulted in a clash breaking out on the streets. Many in the Muslim community are nonetheless worried that the Government is unable to counter the growing threat of extreme Buddhist nationalism. As I have said in the past, the Government must take more concerted, systematic efforts to curb hate speech and violence incited by such nationalist groups. The situation in Rakhine State remains tense with incidents of alleged rape, torture, kidnapping and a village official being stabbed to death continue to be reported. The situation for many of those who fled following the attacks on Border Guard Police facilities on 9 October last year and the subsequent clearance operations remains difficult. While the estimated 20,000 Rohingya who were displaced within Myanmar have mostly returned to or near their places of origin, returnees face significant shelter needs due to the large number of burnt homes, a situation exacerbated by the impact of Cyclone Mora. I am further informed that 332 Rakhine, Dynet and Mro evacuees are still unable to return to their homes. Whilst some of the reported 74,000 Rohingya who fled to Bangladesh appear to have now returned, exact numbers are difficult to ascertain as people fear prosecution for illegal border crossing. I am especially alarmed by the reported recent rise in the number of child brides amongst women and girls who fled Myanmar and live in neighbouring countries. As we are all aware, this perpetuates the cycle of violence and of poverty experienced by these young women. I am also concerned by reports that at least 13 children have been detained by police in Rakhine State in relation to the October 9th attacks. According to a statement released by the State Counsellor’s Office on 5 June, one of these children died on February 2nd due to health reasons. I remind the Government that children should be detained strictly as a last resort, for the shortest appropriate period of time, and must be treated with humanity and respect in a manner which takes into account their age. I urge the Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee the rights of these children not to be arbitrarily deprived of their liberty and to fair and timely proceedings as well as to adequate medical care. Further, I urge the Government to immediately conduct a full investigation into this child’s death including why it was only reported four months later. Please allow me at this point to highlight again Myanmar’s international obligations, in particular, under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. As we all know, by being party to this treaty, the State has made a public commitment as to how it will treat everyone under the age of 18 within its jurisdiction. The provision that has particularly stuck in my mind is Article 2 of the CRC which, among others, reiterates the principle of non-discrimination, and requires appropriate measures to ensure that, “the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child’s parents, legal guardians, or family members.” Myanmar has an obligation with respect to “each child within [its] jurisdiction” without discrimination of any kind. I repeat, within its jurisdiction. This includes all Rohingya children living in Rakhine. With your permission, Mr. President, I would like to ask the Government of Myanmar, if it really has respected and lived up to this promise? Now, I would also like to ask other distinguished representatives here if they have indeed made sure that Myanmar lived up to its promise? I ask this question because of the continuing dire, if not worsening situation of the Rohingyas. Mr President, During my last statement to you, I highlighted the shortcomings in the investigative mechanisms established by the Government to assess the situation in Rakhine State. Unfortunately, there have been no changes to address these concerns. In early March, the Maungdaw Investigation Commission conducted a three-day visit to Rakhine State, still without a robust methodology or witness protection policies in place. I remain unconvinced that the military investigation team, which recently announced its findings dismissing practically all allegations against the security forces as wrong or false, is sufficiently independent or impartial. I note the issuance of the interim report by the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State; and while Myanmar has said it “accepts totally” the interim recommendations therein, implementation has been tentative at best. Although the Government has been closing IDP camps as recommended, many individuals are not being permitted to return to their place of origin, despite their stated desire to do so. Muslims in Kyein Ni Pyin camp, most of who self-identify as Rohingya, were told that the Government would only provide housing in the location of their current displacement, whereas Kaman Muslims in Ramree were only offered transportation options to Yangon and financial support. In contrast, Rakhine Buddhists were offered re-settlement in a neighbouring area, in newly-built homes along with financial compensation, although they have raised concerns that the location is some distance from a school. I am worried that these different re-settlement practices offer little prospect of a durable solution for the 120,000 Rohingya still living in camps, and exacerbate the grievances between the Buddhist and Muslim communities. The Government has estimated that it will take five years to close all the camps, which means that some IDPs could spend as long as ten years confined in these camps. This is simply unacceptable. Distinguished representatives, During my statement in March, I highlighted the proposed joint benchmarks which the Human Rights Council invited me to work with the Government to develop. In the months since then, I have still not seen significant developments on the majority of these benchmarks. In my next visit to Myanmar in July, I hope to discuss with my interlocutors how we can work together to develop a work plan and time frame for their swift implementation. I recognize the inherent difficulties in any democratic transition, and as always, I seek to work with Myanmar to address and overcome the challenges she faces. I stand ready to assist in any way I can to achieve a Myanmar where the rights and fundamental freedoms of all are respected and fully realized. Thank you __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 United Nations

At 9:03 a.m., Judge Nonn began today’s proceedings. The Greffier confirmed that all parties were present except for Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang, and Nuon Chea, who is watching the proceedings remotely. Judge Nonn accepted Nuon Chea’s waiver of his right to be present at today’s hearing due to his medical condition. International Deputy Co-Prosecutor Dale Lysak continued his presentation from yesterday. Mr. Lysak reminded the Chamber that he had been discussing the crime of imprisonment and the deprivation of the right to liberty for thousands of people at the security centers without any due process. Mr. Lysak began with a discussion of the use of confessions from S-21, usually torture-induced confessions, that implicate other people as the basis for arrests. He noted that the S-21 prison chief and his deputy both testified that confessions were sent from Phnom Penh to the Division 801 secretary, after which the named persons were arrested in the division and sent to the division prison at Au Kanseng. Evidence in support of this testimony includes a surviving S-21 confession which includes a handwritten note from Khieu to Comrade Roeun asking him to pick out the relevant named persons in Division 801. In a subsequent report from the division secretary to Son Sen (a CPK party leader), the report states that they were following the trail of new and old elements against the revolution, and also those newly and previously implicated by the enemy. Mr. Lysak gave an example of how the same process and documentary evidence happened in Phnom Kraol in Sector 105. A high-ranking cadre from Sector 105 (who passed away before this trial) stated in an interview with OCIJ that he saw confessions which had been sent to the Sector 105 military chief. In addition, there is in evidence a telegram from Sao Sarun, Sector 105 Secretary, to leaders in Phnom Penh confirming the arrest of a person who had committed moral offenses and who had been previously implicated in another’s confession. In this telegram, he also asked for instructions from the center on what to do with the prisoner. There is handwritten note on this telegram that confirms that it had been specifically forwarded to Nuon Chea. Sao Sarun testified in this case that he had sent this telegram, Sao Sarun claimed that the instruction that he received back from party leaders was to release the prisoner, but other witnesses who knew the prisoner testified that the person had disappeared from Mondulkiri and was never seen again. Sao Sarun also testified that he had received from the center the names of Sector 105 cadres who had been implicated in an S-21 confession of the head of the Sector 105 commerce office. Mr. Lysak offered another example where relatives were targeted. Witnesses testified about a group of men who fled one of the commerce offices for Vietnam, leaving their wives behind. The wives were subsequently sent to S-21. There are many documents available from S-21, and many of these corroborate the policy of sending persons to S-21 based on confessions from other prisoners. Mr. Lysak said that the arbitrary and extrajudicial nature of arrests can be seen in a letter to Duch from a member of the committee at the Kampong Som port, regarding a cadre from the North Zone who was being sent to S-21. The letter states that this “contemptible” person was being transferred to S-21, along with his “contemptible” wife, and that he was related to other “contemptible” persons. The person was being transferred because of three driving-related incidents, specifically that he did not know how to brake properly, he used the wrong vehicle to tow a truck and overheated the engine, and he caused damage to an excavator’s suspension when he drove it down a mountain and braked by dragging the shovel along the road, which then broke the suspension. The driver was sent to S-21 and three weeks later was sent to his execution. Mr. Lysak emphasized that this was a perfect example of why due process is necessary before persons are deprived of their liberty. Mr. Lysak gave a similar example for the Kraing Ta Chan prison. One of the documents that survived from that prison identifies 29 prisoners. The first 20 were mostly former Lon Nol soldiers who were arrested because they were part of a network that planned to escape to Thailand or Vietnam. The next seven prisoners had broken spoons or hoes in their cooperatives. Prisoner number 28 had complained about the food, and prisoner number 29 was an elderly former village chief who had taken food to eat. Mr. Lysak stated that according to a review of the evidence from Kraing Ta Chan, approximately half of the documented Kraing Ta Chan prisoners were former soldiers, officials, or police from the Khmer Republic. Witnesses had testified regarding the instructions given by the Tram Kok district committee to identify and purge former Lon Nol who held ranking position. Almost three-fourths of the former Lon Nol prisoners at Kraing Ta Chan held the office of warrant officer or higher. With regard to the purge of former Lon Nol officials, the defense for Nuon Chea offered a contrary witness. Mr. Lysak reminded the Chamber that this witness had Tram Kok early in the regime, and his story is undermined by the fact that his brother was a former Lon Nol soldier who was arrested and imprisoned by much of the regime. Regardless of discrepancies or disputes between witness testimony on the policy at Tram Kok, is resolved by surviving records from communes that clearly document an instruction and policy to target Lon Nol officers. Mr. Lysak reviewed two of these commune documents that detail successive efforts to find and smash former “enemy officers.” Mr. Lysak stated that arresting or imprisoning relatives because they held a position in or supported a former regime is not due process, but persecution. Also related to Kraing Ta Chan, the first witness before the Chamber in this case testified that almost his entire family was arrested and imprisoned in Kraing Ta Chan because his father and brother-in-law tried to vote out a local village chief. Mr. Lysak offered a document that corroborate this detention and references the execution of his father and brother-in-law. Mr. Lysak gave another example of a woman and child who spent 1.5 years at Kraing Ta Chan because of the confession of her co-worker. Mr. Lysak next reviewed the conditions at the prisons, discussing the prisons together. He noted that there are five truths about the inhumane conditions common to all of the security centers: Prisoners were shackled in their cells. Prisoners had to relieve themselves in cells while shackled in their cells. Hygiene was nonexistent. Prisoners did not receive sufficient food. Prisoners often became ill, did not receive proper medical care, and many died as a result. With regard to the use of shackles, Mr. Lysak showed photographs of the different ways that prisoners were shackled at the different prisons, for example, at the big prisons, the shackles were connected to long metal bars. Many prisoners were shackled at all times, including when they slept. Witnesses testified that the effect of the shackling was severe pain and numbness in prisoners’ legs, making it difficult to walk. Next, Mr. Lysak described how prisoners had to use a variety of containers to relieve themselves, such as coconut shells, bamboo tubes, ammunition cases, or other such containers that were passed from one prisoner to another. They had to eat and sleep where they relieved themselves. Mr. Lysak described how the lack of hygiene caused many of the prisoners to suffer from bed bugs or body lice. Cells were infested by bugs and rodents. Witnesses testified to the harmful effects of the lack of hygiene, which were both physical and mental. Witnesses also described the smell of death at the prisons. Mr. Lysak gave examples of the lack of food at the prisons. Witnesses described their hunger at the prisons and the size of the rations. The portions were insufficient such that women could not produce breast milk, which in turn resulted in the death of their nursing children. Witnesses said they did not think of anything other than being thirsty or hungry, and one witness said that he would have eaten human flesh, just so that he could stop being hungry. Lastly, on the subject of medical care, Mr. Lysak recalled the Au Kanseng prison chief’s testimony that more prisoners died from disease than executions. At Kraing Ta Chan, when people died, they were left in the cells overnight. And at S-21, daily reports would have notes at the bottom in handwriting detailing the prisoner deaths from disease. One witness testified that his father had been in good health before his arrest, and had only been at S-21 for one month before he died of dysentery and wounds. Mr. Lysak noted that Annex F, filed with the prosecution final brief, lists the daily totals from the S-21 daily control lists that recorded the deaths each day by disease. There were records available for 258 days and during this period, 235 prisoners died from disease at S-21, with an increase of deaths over time. Mr. Lysak referred to Chum Mey testimony about the conditions at S-21. Chum Mey testified that he never thought he would survive S-21 and every day he lay on his back and waited to die. Mr. Lysak noted that the Nuon Chea Defense has questioned Chum Mey’s detention at S-21, even though Duch and other survivors have testified that Chum Mey was at S-21, there are multiple prison lists that identify Chum Mey at S-21, and his confession is in the surviving S-21 records. Mr. Lysak noted the critical role of a vigorous defense in these proceedings, but he also noted that the defense attack on Chum Mey was void of merit and suggested that it highlights the weakness in Nuon Chea’s defense in this case. Mr. Lysak next discussed the crime of torture. He said that it has been proved beyond any doubt that torture was used at the prisons, as it has been described by survivors, admitted to by the interrogators, and by the chief of the prison at the time he was on trial for that crime. There were also notebooks kept by S-21 interrogators that document their systematic use of torture. The torture at S-21 was not minor – it included severe beatings, electric shocks administered until the victim was unconscious, and pulling out fingernails and toenails. Mr. Lysak then gave several examples of torture testified to by witnesses, and corroborated by documentary evidence. Some of the strongest documentary evidence is the contemporaneous notebooks of interrogators that contain the instructions and training that they received. The instructions were explicit on the use of torture, stating that it cannot be avoided, the only question is whether there will be a little or a lot of torture. The instructions also stated that the objective of torture is to get the victims’ answers, so they must feel pain so that they respond quickly. Mr. Lysak reviewed additional witness testimony from prisoners at the different prisons who survived or witnesses torture at those prisons. One of the highlights of Mr. Lysak’s presentation on torture was the linking of similar torture methods across all the prisons. For example, he presented evidence that reports from Kraing Ta Chan and Trapeang Thom commune both confirmed the use of hot and cold interrogations on prisoners. Mr. Lysak thinks the reference to hot and cold interrogation methods in this district is significant as hot and cold methods were also used in S-21. Mr. Lysak stated that this evidence shows that torture was widespread and systematic and used across all prisons. The use of torture was also widely known, from the commune chiefs to the party leaders. For example, one of the members of the CPK standing committee, Vorn Vet, had instructed Duch how to torture using a plastic bag. With regard to the knowledge of the Accused of the use of torture, Mr. Lysak explained that the annotations on documents like confession summary reports show that those reports were distributed to zone, division, and ministry leaders around the country. Confession summaries frequently contained descriptions of the use of torture. In their own words, Nuon Chea told to Thet Sambath, his biographer, that people normally confessed after beatings and torture, and Khieu Samphan admitted to a reporter from Le Monde that “there was indeed a state institution in which systematic crime, torture, extermination, were state policy.” Next, Mr. Lysak presented evidence on the crime of murder and extermination. He stated that the evidence shows that the killings at the security centers were conducted at a massive scale and the evidence of this is beyond any dispute. In his first example, Mr. Lysak explained how, the prison chief, deputy chief and surviving prisoners from Au Kansang prison all testified to a mass execution of between 100 to 200 prisoners from Vietnam that took place at the security office. The prison chief and deputy also testified that the order to kill these prisoners came to them from Division 801, but that the order had come to Division 801 from the Northeast Zone secretary. This was relevant because it was the Northeast Zone secretary who had reported that Division 801 had arrested 209 Vietnamese who had come across the border. And it was the Northeast Zone secretary who had contacted the party leaders on how to proceed. The telegram requesting instructions was copied to Nuon Chea, Office 870 and the center archives. Mr. Lysak concluded that what is clear from this example is that the leaders in Phnom Penh were to decide the fate of these prisoners. Mr. Lysak then gave two more examples of killing on a massive scale at Kraing Ta Chan and at Tram Kok. Briefly, the guards who worked at Kraing Ta Chan and the few survivors testified that with few exceptions the prisoners who were sent to Kraing Ta Chan were killed. He gave examples of witness and civil party testimony that corroborated this. As at S-21, the testimony of these witnesses is confirmed with contemporaneous documents from Kraing Ta Chan. Mr. Lysak showed the court a monthly report from Kraing Ta Chan that totaled the number of people entered the prison, how many were killed that month, the number who died from illness, and how many remained in the prison. Another Kraing Ta Chan interrogation report contains a handwritten order from the Sector 13 Secretary to “smash them all”. Mr. Lysak also highlighted witness testimony and documentary evidence that showed that a Tram Kok District Secretary authorized the killing of children and toddlers who would not be separated from their mothers who were to be executed. Mr. Lysak stated that these killings were not rogue acts, but done pursuant to the policies and instruction from the CPK leaders. Mr. Lysak reviewed the analysis of remains from mass graves at the Kraing Ta Chan, noting that the remains had not been properly maintained over the years so the number analyzed will not accurately reflect the original number of remains. An analysis of the approximately 1,900 skulls from Kraing Ta Chan shows the clear markings of violent trauma inflicted on them. Mr. Lysak then reviewed the evidence of murder and extermination at S-21. He noted that Duch and the prison cadres have testified that all who came to S-21 were to be smashed. This testimony comes from the cadre who wrote down the names of all who arrived, the guard who took prisoners from the S-21 compound to Choeung Ek, and the guard who escorted the prisoners to the mass graves at Choeung Ek where they were killed. A study of the remains at Choeung Ek was done and of the more than 6,000 skulls examined, only one did not have any markings of violent trauma. Mr. Lysak next discussed the documentary evidence of execution lists. To give some context, he noted that during the 1977 and 1978 purges there were at least 27 instances of mass executions where more than 100 persons were killed in a day. There was also a month in which more than 1,000 prisoners were killed. In October 1977, 418 were killed in one day at S-21. These execution lists show the intent to kill on a massive scale and prove that the crime of extermination was committed. Next, Mr. Lysak clarified the change in the estimated number of people killed at S-21 that has occurred since the end of Case 001. When asked, Duch had said the actual number of people who were killed at S-21 may have exceeded the approximately 12,300 names that had been compiled into a list. Last year, OCIJ added to this list of executions at S-21 by reviewing all the entry records for S-21 and adding a source for each of the prisoners on the list. Due to time constraints, OCIJ only reviewed the entry lists for S-21, and subsequently, the prosecution team reviewed all of the execution records in evidence. The prosecution team updated the list with any missing execution dates for those prisoners already on the list, and added prisoners not yet listed. The reason that new names were found by the prosecution team is that both the entry lists and the execution lists for S-21 are missing records. When the prosecution team finished, they had identified approximately 18,000 persons who had been detained at S-21, and where the original OCIJ list had 5,000 execution dates, the prosecution added an additional 6,000 execution dates, for a total of more than 11,000 confirmed execution dates. Next, Mr. Lysak discussed the critical issue of Nuon Chea’s role at S-21. Some of the most damaging evidence against Nuon Chea comes from Duch, who has testified that he reported directly to Nuon Chea after Son Sen was assigned to the eastern battle front to command troops against the Vietnamese. Nuon Chea gave Duch his orders, including the East Zone purges and the purges of the RAK cadres toward the end of the regime. Duch’s testimony about his relationship with Nuon Chea is also substantiated by documentary and other witness testimony, which was covered in detail by Mr. Lysak. This testimony included a handwritten note by Duch on an instruction he received from Nuon Chea to remove names from a confession, testimony from Nuon Chea’s bodyguard that he personally delivered letters from the Accused to Duch, and returned thick envelopes from Duch to Nuon Chea. And finally, a film clip of Nuon Chea where he admits to Thet Sambath that he received many confessions from Duch and used them to educate the junior cadres. Mr. Lysak stated that this evidence makes it that Nuon Chea played an integral role in the security office. Mr. Lysak explained that while Khieu Samphan did not have the same role as Nuon Chea had when it came to S-21, Khieu Samphan clearly had knowledge and he made a significant contribution to the joint criminal enterprise. One indication of Khieu Samphan’s role was his responsibility for the late King Father Norodom Sihanouk, possibly the most important prisoner in Cambodia. In March 1976 when King Sihanouk asked to resign, it was Khieu Samphan who took this request to the standing committee, where it was decided that the King was not allowed to leave the country but would be put into house arrest at the palace and kept alive if he did not resist. It was also decided to send a wire to the King’s children to return to Cambodia immediately for the New Year’s celebration. The real reason for the recall of his children was acknowledged in the minutes of the meeting, which was so that “the problem could be resolved cleanly.” Mr. Lysak stated that we know that many of the King’s children and family were killed. Mr. Lysak showed a video clip of Khieu Samphan in which he reveals his knowledge of meetings and decisions by the standing committee on whether to arrest fellow CPK members. Mr. Lysak explained that Khieu Samphan described arrest decisions by Pol Pot and the standing committee in detail in this clip. Two of the standing committee members who regularly attended meeting with Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea were sent to S-21, and later Khieu Samphan’s friend and colleague was also sent to S-21. Despite this, Khieu Samphan continued to wholeheartedly support and implement CPK policies. Just after his friend’s arrest in 1977, Khieu Samphan stated that “we must follow CPK policies and everything must be done neatly and thoroughly.” In an interview with Steve Heder, Khieu Samphan spoke extensively about Vietnamese agents who had infiltrated the highest level of the party including the standing and central committees. The Accused stated that “we managed to deal with those people completely.” Mr. Lysak stated that this evidence refutes the lie that Khieu Samphan repeated to OCIJ that he did not know of a single arrest during the Democratic Kampuchea. Lastly, Mr. Lysak discussed evidence related to political education meetings and the Accused’s support of CPK policies. He noted that in these two trials, the Chamber has heard about political education meetings given by both Accused, sometimes together, and has heard witnesses describe the political education meetings. One witness heard Nuon Chea play a recording of a confession at one of these meetings. Mr. Lysak recalled a speech that Khieu Samphan gave to people of the East Zone, where he instructed people to not betray the party or be killed. Nuon Chea, in an interview with Thet Sambath, clearly expressed his support for killings of traitors of the regime by saying that killing traitors saved the Khmer people and so it was the correct decision. He also said that if the individual becomes a problem, they must be solved. Nuon Chea, by his own admission, has no regrets for those who were killed because they were enemies of the people. He agreed with Pol Pot’s decision to kill all the traitors, at the time he just wanted to fix the problem and that was the correct solution. Thet Sambath asked Nuon Chea why the CPK leaders had to kill the traitors instead of imprisoning them for life, Nuon Chea responded, “that is an easy question to ask, but a difficult one to answer. At that time, we had no proper prisons, and if we kept them, they would spread and produce their eggs and many more would have been killed.” Mr. Lysak noted that Nuon Chea’s support of killing not just the person accused of disloyalty but the persons related to them. Next, Mr. Lysak yielded the floor to International Co-Prosecutor Nicholas Koumjian, who spoke about crimes against the Vietnamese and the Cham, and the elements of genocide. Mr. Koumjian began by emphasizing that genocide is a crime against a group. It does not depend on the number of persons killed, as compared to the crime of extermination, where killing must be on a massive scale. Because of this, theoretically genocide can be committed with a single killing if that killing was done with the intent to destroy a group. And a group has to be a national, ethnic, religious or racial group. In Case 002/02, genocide is charged for the treatment of the Vietnamese and the Cham. Mr. Koumjian reviewed a little of the history of genocide, noting that it came into existence as a crime in 1946, when the United Nations general assembly said that genocide is the denial of the right of existence of an entire group that shocks the conscious of mankind, results in great losses to humanity, and is contrary to moral law. He reviewed the definition of genocide, which is particular. Genocide requires any of five different types of acts committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such. The five types of acts are killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction; imposing measures to prevent births; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Mr. Koumjian noted that killing members of the group is what is charged in this case, specifically, that the destruction of the Vietnamese and Cham in Cambodia was caused, at least in part, by killing members of the group. Before his discussion of genocide, Mr. Koumjian first addressed the defense position on intent and how intent is related to joint criminal enterprise. In Nuon Chea’s final brief, he makes the statement that the physical perpetrators of the acts have to share whatever the intent is for the crime at issue with the members of the joint criminal enterprise. Mr. Koumjian argued that this interpretation of the law is mistaken. He noted that the defense cited the ICTY Brdanin Trial Judgement, and it is accurate that the Trial Chamber did state this requirement for shared intent. However, Mr. Koumjian points out that this requirement was overturned on appeal on that very same case. Moreover, the appeal chamber and all the subsequent jurisprudence that addresses this issue recognize that the joint criminal enterprise can use a perpetrator to commit the crime. He offered an example to illustrate this: the intent of the guards at Choeung Ek is irrelevant, as they were carrying out orders. It is not important whether the guards at Choeung Ek had genocidal intent, so long as they were being used by the joint criminal enterprise to carry out that act. So, the question at issue is whether the crime is part of the common purpose of the joint criminal enterprise, and it is the genocidal intent of the joint criminal enterprise members that matters. Mr. Koumjian quoted from a book called The Collective Theory of Genocidal Intent, which phrased the concept another way: “Low level actors [the shooters, the executioners at Choeung Ek with the hoes and with the knife] do not occupy a role that would allow them to destroy the group, and therefore they cannot truly form that intention. Whether physical perpetrators at the lower echelon of genocidal enterprises possess genocidal intent is no longer relevant to the attribution of physical liability of genocide.” Mr. Koumjian next discussed the crimes against the Vietnamese. He noted that evidence in this case shows that the intent of what to do with the Vietnamese changed over time. At the beginning of the regime, it was CPK policy to remove the Vietnamese, usually by sending them to Vietnam. Over time, and towards the latter days of the regime, the intent was to kill the Vietnamese that remained. Mr. Koumjian notes that deporting or transferring individuals is not a genocidal act, but that it can show the intent to commit genocide. In Srebrenica, the evidence showed that the Serbs transferred women, children, and elderly, which could be a physical means to ensure the destruction of the Bosnian Muslim community because it would make it harder to reconstitute the community. In case 002/01, the Secretary of Sector 105 testified that Pol Pot had said that he wanted to drive all the Vietnamese from the area of Democratic Kampuchea. Mr. Koumjian notes that an issue of Revolutionary Flag describes the deportations by saying that there were many foreigners but one type of foreigner was strongly poisonous and dangerous to our people, they came to wolf us down, came to take away everything and endanger our nation and our people. In a later issue, it states that our revolution got them permanently out from our territory and swept thousands clean. The policy of sending Vietnamese to Vietnam changed, and this was highlighted by the testimony of a high-level cadre at this trial revealed the true intent of the regime’s policy and how it changed. “I heard about Vietnamese living in Kampuchea. Vietnamese who lived in Cambodia did return to cause trouble to Kampuchea people and are not leaving. Initially, starting from 1970, they were peacefully sent back to their country by the Cambodian government and that continued until 1975. “And later on, we were instructed that Vietnamese had to be smashed because they did not return to their country.” Mr. Koumjian stated that this was the point at which the policy changed. This message was what was disseminated to cadres in the country. In 1978, Nuon Chea praised the army for crushing the Vietnamese strategy of exterminating the Kampuchean race. Mr. Koumjian said that often, those leaders who are planning a genocide will often characterize the victims as a threat to their own people to incite the killing. He gave examples from Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan and Pol Pot where they predicted the end of the Khmer people by the hand of the Vietnamese, depicted the Vietnamese as barbaric and cruel, and accused the Vietnamese of having genocidal intent against the Khmer. Mr. Koumjian provided evidence that this was a strategy on the part of the CPK leaders, as King Norodom recalled that he had a conversation with Khieu Samphan where Khieu Samphan said that to unite the people the best thing we could to is incite them to hate the Vietnamese more and more every day. The Democratic Kampuchea leaders looked for a foreign enemy to blame for the suffering of their people. In 1978, Office 870 disseminated instructions that it was imperative to constantly stir up national and class anger against the Vietnamese. At that time, the only committee member at Office 870 was Khieu Samphan. Witnesses testified that the instruction from the leaders to cadres was to kill all Vietnamese as the Khmer’s hereditary enemy, even if the person in question was a baby. With regard to the genocidal intent of the CPK, Mr. Koumjian stated that the words of the leader of an organization are critical in understanding what the organization intends. Pol Pot gave a speech in which he stated that “we have implemented one against 30, meaning we lose one, the Yuan lose thirty.” He went on to say when we have two million, they need 60 million, so we already have more than we need because they only have 50 million. This indicated that, if there were 8 million Cambodians at the time, then Pol Pot was willing to sacrifice 2 million to kill all the Vietnamese because 2 million people is enough to kill the 50 million Vietnamese. Mr. Koumjian stated that one of the consequences of this policy and incitement could be seen in actions by Democratic Kampuchea troops when the crossed the border and attacked in Vietnam. He recognized that attacks in Vietnam are outside the scope of this case, but noted that they are relevant to intent. He also noted that the defense position is that these attacks did not occur. Mr. Koumjian said that it has been shown in trial, including by an expert requested by defense, Steven Chandler that in 1977 the Khmer Rouge attacked several villages and towns in southern Vietnam, burning houses and killing hundreds of people. Other witnesses testified to the brutality and mindlessness of the violence of the attacks. Mr. Koumjian noted that this violence was also commented on by Khieu Samphan in his book about Cambodia’s recent history, where he wrote that the events recounted are irrefutable and there is no doubt that the Khmer Rouge made forays into Vietnamese villages along the border, committing appalling crimes against Vietnamese civilians. There is documentary evidence corroborating that Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea knew about these attacks, including telegrams sent to Pol Pot, Khieu Samphan, Nuon Chea, and Office 870 describing the firepower used, the destruction of military and civilian houses, and the killing of Vietnamese. Mr. Koumjian stated that in 1977, a decision had been made not to deport the Vietnamese, but to kill them. In the Northwest Zone, a witness testified that he was instructed to report any Vietnamese and they would be killed. Mr. Koumjian showed a video compilation of a number of witness statements about how the Vietnamese were treated. The witnesses testified about discovering their killed family members, especially their children, and how the policy was to “kill the grass, you must take up the roots” which meant that relatives were also killed. They testified that if there was Khmer husband and a Vietnamese wife, the wife and children would be taken away and killed. One witness testified that all the Vietnamese in his village had been taken. There was also documentary evidence, including a telegram from the West Zone saying it had applied the party line to remove and sweep clean Vietnamese and that the result was the smashing of “100 ethnic Yuons, included small and big, adults and children”. At the end of the regime, the treatment of the remaining Vietnamese could be seen in the numbers of Vietnamese at S-21. Mr. Koumjian showed a graph showing the monthly totals of Vietnamese arrested and sent at S-21, and another graph showing that in S-21, there were 728 individuals identified as Vietnamese, of which about 35% were soldiers, and 49% classified as civilians. With regards to the accuracy of the reporting at S-21, Mr. Koumjian noted that one of the S-21 cadres testified that children were not recorded at S-21, so the records will not reflect the total number of children killed at S-21. There are seven Vietnamese children who do appear in the S-21 records, and the prosecutor showed a few of the pictures of the children, most under the age of 10-years old. Two of the children were 7-year old boys and were described in the S-21 records as “Vietnamese spies.” Mr. Koumjian referred to a Revolutionary Flag issue from April 1978 which celebrated the eradication of Yuon in the Democratic Kampuchea and stated that there were formerly 1,000,000 of them, and now, not one seed. Mr. Koumjian stated that the killings of the Vietnamese are genocide as they were an attempt to destroy the Vietnamese in Cambodia, as such. Next, Mr. Koumjian addressed the treatment of the Cham. He returned to the definition of genocide and noted that it is still a developing area in international law, and one of the outstanding questions of interpretation is what the words “as such” mean. As all words in the statute are presumed to have a meaning, what does it mean to destroy a religious group, as such? The prosecution submit that a religious group has a collective practice, and if you destroy the ability of the group to practice the religion, then even if individuals survive, the group has been destroyed, as such. Mr. Koumjian notes that there are various ways to this, some of which are genocide, and some of which are not, depending on whether the act is a genocidal act. Some interpretations of “as such” are that if you kill the Cham because they are Muslim you have destroyed the group “as such”, but Mr. Koumjian notes that act is already included in the definition of genocide, so what do the words “as such” mean? In his opinion “as such” means the identity of the group as a group. He offered an example that if you tell a religious group that they have to convert or be killed, then you have destroyed the group, as such, because those individuals who do not convert will be killed, those who do convert will no longer belong to the group, so the group has been destroyed. Mr. Koumjian said this is a critical interpretation because the policy relating to treatment of the Cham also evolved over time, and the attempt to forcibly assimilate the Cham occurred early in the regime even before 1975. The policy changed in 1978 when the Cham refused to give up their religion and rebelled against the Khmer Rouge. The policy then changed to killing the Cham, but also to try to disperse the Cham out of the areas where they were traditionally concentrated along the Mekong River. Mr. Koumjian reviewed the evidence related to the forcible assimilation of the Cham, which was done by prohibiting the practice of the religion. He noted the Defense’s citations to acts prohibiting the practice of religion that do not violate international law (like not praying in the street). He referred to one of the cases that the Defense cited, in which the decision clearly provides that international law recognizes that it is a human right to practice one’s religion, that religious freedom is primarily a matter of individual conscience, and implies the freedom to manifest alone and in public or in community with others whose faith one shares. The Khmer Rouge forbade the practice of religion for the Cham and also for the Buddhists. Teaching children was forbidden, and the Khmer Rouge tried to disperse the Cham to other areas of Cambodia. Mr. Koumjian reviewed the witness testimony that supported the existence and implementation of the policy on the treatment of the Cham. For example, one witness said a higher representative of Angkar told him that there would only be one single population and that is Khmer, and that there would be no Cham. He also said the Cham were not allowed to stay in their village, they were dispersed, the religion was abolished, and were not allowed to worship anymore. Another Cham witness testified that women were forced to cut their hair short, all were made to eat pork, and they were not allowed to speak the Cham language. Mr. Koumjian then discussed the circumstances of the Cham rebellion, which was reported in a document from Sector 5. There were not many Cham in the Northwest Zone, but some were there and they attempted to rely on the Constitution’s right to freedom of religion. They protested the food they were given as being against their religion, and the response was to look for the head of their movement in order to sweep clean. Mr. Koumjian explained that another way to destroy a group is to target parts of the group that are necessary for the group’s survival. If a specific part of the group is emblematic of the entire group or necessary for its survival and it is targeted and destroyed, then that act meets the standard of genocide, as the requirement is to destroy the group in whole or in part. Mr. Koumjian states that this is what happened to the Cham. In the Democratic Kampuchea, the number of hakim (village leaders) declined from about 113 to 20, and the number of tun (teachers of Islam) from 300 to 38. An expert testified that in the early Democratic Kampuchea years, killing was not targeted against all Cham but just those who refused to give up religion, customs, and language. Mr. Koumjian says that targeting the people who refuse to give up the customs and language is enough to meet the standard for genocide. The prosecution submits that the removal of the Cham from the three districts that have been their traditional home may meet the standard as well. One of the members of the standing committee said in a letter that the effort to disperse the Cham was part of the policy of the CPK. Next, Mr. Koumjian discusses the testimony of a critical witness, the District Secretary of Kampong Siem. He first reviewed the defense position, in which Nuon Chea, recognizing how damaging and powerful her testimony is in establishing a genocidal policy against the Cham, puts forth a “silly conspiracy theory” about how the prosecution could have been so prescient as to put down this witness to testify in this section of the trial. Mr. K’s response to Defense is that anyone who knows the case file and wants to get to the truth would want to hear from the District Secretary of Kampong Siem. Mr. Koumjian notes that there is “plenty” in the case file that details the activity in Kampong Siem. For example, an expert witness wrote in his book that the death toll of Cham was particularly brutal in Kampong Siem and Democratic Kampuchea documents indicate that nearly all the Cham there were executed, with estimates ranging from 2,000 families to 10,000 people. There were ten Cham villages completely destroyed during the Democratic Kampuchea, and five of those were in Kampong Siem. Mr. Koumjian returned to the District Secretary of Kampong Siem, who testified that there was an order from the sector to the districts to purge the Cham. She wondered why the leaders wanted to purge the Cham people. She was asked how many Cham were in the Kampong Siem district and she did not know. She continued wondering why the Cham people should be purged, but as the order came from the upper echelon, she simply implemented it. Mr. Koumjian described this witness as defensive about her role, she testified that during the purge she only knew that the Cham had been taken away and killed. She was told by the Sector Secretary. She told OCIJ that her orders were clear, and she had no choice but to follow them. Her subordinate, the commune secretary, testified that she was required to compile lists of Cham, Vietnamese and Lon Nol soldiers. The District Secretary further testified that she noticed the gradual diminishing of the Cham, and the district military commander told her that the Cham had all been purged. The commune secretary also testified that the district secretary went to Phnom Penh once or twice a month. Other witnesses heard the District Secretary talk about the policy of the upper echelon and that Cham were the enemy and needed to be eliminated. Mr. Koumjian next described various testimony from multiple witnesses in various districts where the policy on treatment of the Cham was implemented. Witnesses interviewed by OCIJ said that there were about 292 Cham families in 12 villages in one commune, only 3 people survived. Many of their corpses were dumped in water wells or bomb craters. Mr. Koumjian estimates that there were approximately 1,465 Cham individuals in that commune alone. The District Secretary of Kampong Siem testified that she reported 1,600 Cham families, which would be approximately 8,000 individuals. Mr. Koumjian highlighted an interesting fact about the District Secretary of Kampong Siem, which was that she had adopted a daughter who was Cham. And this was the only Cham that she saved. Mr. Koumjian then discussed the treatment of the Cham at the Kang Meas District. After the arrival of the southwest cadres, a long sword group would receive orders from the Secretary at the Kang Meas District to arrest Cham. In addition to Cham, there were also “new” people and former Lon Nol soldiers in Wat Au Trakuon, the prison for the district. But there were differences in how people were treated: entire Cham families were arrested together, they were not interrogated as there was no need to look for their “string” (their relatives and connections), and they were all going to be executed, sometimes 100 Cham at a time. One of the members of the long sword group said that all the Cham were arrested in a certain commune once the southwest cadres had arrived. Mr. Koumjian then reviewed a significant amount of testimony from individuals who noticed the disappearance of the Cham in their villages, communes or areas, or witnessed the arrests of Cham, or witnesses the dead bodies of the Cham that had been deposited in the Mekong River. Mr. Koumjian showed a second compilation video with testimonies from Cham witnesses about how they were forced to eat pork, family members who refused to abandon their religion, witnessing the killing of Cham by a large pit, the dumping of the bodies of people, children and babies into the river, how people were tied to one another and then towed into the river and left in the middle of the river to drown, and then that process repeated over and over. Mr. Koumjian continued by stating that it has never been the prosecution’s position that the Khmer Rouge killed the entirety of the Cham people, but that they destroyed the group, as such. He reiterated that genocide is designed to protect the group identity, not the individual. He explained that “destroy” cannot only mean to kill people because the five genocidal acts include the transfer of children of the group to another group. When this happens, the children stay alive, but they would learn a different language, customs, and religion, and then the group would not exist. In this case, the killings took place, they were concentrated in places that were important to Cham survival, and they targeted the leaders of the Cham community and religious practice. For these reasons, genocide of the Cham occurred beyond a reasonable doubt. One witness from the Central Zone told the court that after the Khmer Rouge had taken hold of the area, Cham were merged with Khmer people. In 1977, Cham were taken to Wat Au Trakuon to be killed, and he explained the reason for the CPK policies by saying that the CPK simply wanted one pure race. In his last topic, Mr. Koumjian moved on to discuss the role of the accused, which he called the Gang of Three. He stated that the CPK was an authoritarian regime, they came to power through force and deception, and there were no elections except for the fake election for a parliament led by Nuon Chea. So, Mr. Koumjian posited, how were decisions made in this type of environment? In his book, Considerations on the History of Cambodia, Khieu Samphan wrote that in communist states all decisions are made inside a central leadership framework, and these decisions must be implemented the same way by each individual. Mr. Koumjian notes that there has to be some measure of discretion for those lower down on the ladder of power as it is impossible for leaders to make every decision for every person, but that does not mean that Khieu Samphan or Nuon Chea can avoid responsibility or criminal liability for the policies they set or the crimes they authorized. Next, Mr. Koumjian reviewed the framework of responsibility in the CPK. The statute of the CPK states that three regular armies of the Democratic Kampuchea must be under the absolute leadership monopoly of the CPK. And the central committee decision from March 30, 1976, the first matter it deals with is the right to smash inside and outside the ranks of the party. It also indicates that the objective is a framework, an absolute implementation of our revolution to strengthen our socialist democracy, to strengthen our state authority. Mr. Koumjian stated that, while the right to kill is delegated to the zone committee, or equivalent committees in the autonomous sectors or the military, Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan cannot avoid responsibility for how killings were implemented by those below them when they were specifically authorized to do those killings and those killings follow the policies set by the center. As central leaders, they implemented criminal policy in three ways: Orders and decisions that they issued Speeches and trainings By example – no place set a better example than S-21, where even people closest to Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan were taken there Mr. Koumjian stated that these center leaders set a clear example of the kind of ruthless, brutal policies should be carried out. And lastly, they killed any rivals who challenged their rule. Mr. Koumjian stated that the zones reported and took instruction from the center and the secretaries went to Phnom Penh for trainings. In an interview, Khieu Samphan said that Pol Pot hunted down and made arrests with the participation of the standing committee, he never did anything alone. Khieu Samphan would know this because he was involved. Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea were Pol Pot’s closest associates. Mr. Koumjian clarifies that he is not saying they were among Pol Pot’s closest associates, but that Pol Pot’s two closest associates were limited to Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea. This gang of three were responsible for CPK policies and implementation. They remained with Pol Pot until his arrest and death, they never disagreed with him, even after the regime, never spoke badly about him, even after. Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan protected each other, like Nuon Chea’s order to Duch to remove references to Khieu Samphan in an S-21 interrogation. Pol Pot’s bodyguard testified that the Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, and Pol Pot ate three meals together, every day. They worked together, every day. They lived near each other. Khieu Samphan says the same, that as for daily life, the three of them did nothing separately. Nuon Chea also said the same, that during the Democratic Kampuchea regime the three regularly ate their meals together. A high-level cadre, Pol Pot’s personal interpreter, testified in case 002/01, and he said that Nuon Chea was brother number two, and Nuon Chea was the strongest man after Pol Pot. He described Nuon Chea as Pol Pot’s shadow. Khieu Samphan said that he thought Pol Pot was a great leader, and in an interview, showed where Pol Pot lived, and said he followed Pol Pot all the time, like a shadow. So, a double shadow supported Pol Pot all the time, even before the Democratic Kampuchea regime. Khieu Samphan was loyal to Pol Pot, and even emotional about it – said he can still see Pol Pot in the Cardamom Mountains, and that he misses him because he had a very rare mind. In the film Behind the Killing Fields, Nuon Chea talks about how Pol Pot came to power. Nuon Chea had asked Pol Pot to lead and Pol Pot agreed, but on the condition that they would do everything as a team. When asked if there were ever disputes between Pol Pot and himNuon Chea said there were no dispute between them in 1975 to 1979. Mr. Koumjian then said that from the forced transfer, and the cooperatives, and the 190 security centers where people were killed with no judicial process, to the genocide against the Cham and Vietnamese, Nuon Chea confirms that he had no disagreements with Pol Pot. When Khieu was asked in “Facing Genocide” about Pol Pot, he said that “they say” Pol Pot is a dictator and talk about genocide but that he was a great leader and if Pol Pot could act like that he would not have been able to make such a movement. Khieu Samphan also said that he wants to should it out at the trial. Nuon Chea and Pol Pot had self-criticism sessions and Pol Pot would criticize Nuon Chea for being too hard line, and Nuon Chea would criticize Pol Pot for being too trusting. They defected to the government on the same day, on December 25, 1998. Nuon Chea told Thet Sambath that there was a confession implicating Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea told Duch to not report this again and never return with implications of Khieu Samphan. Mr. Koumjian stated that these three created a circle of power responsible for the policies of the Democratic Kampuchea regime. For his defense, Khieu Samphan has relied upon the claim that he was unaware of the enslavements or purges or other crimes that were occurring in the Democratic Kampuchea. When asked in the movie how many people died in the Khmer Rouge regime, Khieu Samphan said it was many, but not as many as two million, that was exaggerated. And regarding his personal responsibility, Khieu Samphan claimed he did not have any power and did not know anything. He asks himself why he did not know and says that maybe he could be criticized for not finding out but that he did not try because he respected the party discipline. But he did not feel tricked or cheated because Pol Pot did not tell him what was going on, because Pol Pot was right about everything and he had reasons for everything. Mr. Koumjian says that Khieu Samphan was contradicting himself when he said that Pol Pot had reasons for everything he did, because how could he know that if he did not know what was going on? Mr. Koumjian asked rhetorically what the three men talked about when they had dinner together, finding it incredulous that they would talk about subject like pop culture or sports, and “of course Khieu Samphan knew what was going on.” Mr. Koumjian next reviewed some of Khieu Samphan’s history with the communist party, and reiterated that when Khieu Samphan’s stated that he was not a man of the party and not a Khmer Rouge leader, he is lying to avoid his responsibility for what occurred. In his book, Khieu Samphan said in 1978 he did hear of atrocities because his wife’s relatives were affected, so he ordered his wife’s relatives released, and did nothing for anyone else. Nine people that Khieu Samphan was responsible for were killed by the end of the regime, and a number of people from the standing committee that he worked with were killed, so he had to have knowledge. Khieu Samphan told OCIJ that he was invited once or twice a month to join “extended” standing committee meetings which were effectively Pol Pot monologues. Khieu Samphan said that the meetings were very friendly and everyone got along in those meetings. Mr. Koumjian showed a graph depicting who of the standing committee had attended the most standing committee meetings. Nuon Chea had attended the most (18), then Pol Pot (17), Khieu Samphan (16), Doeun (purged) (12), Ieng Sary (10), Son Sen (10), Vorn Vet (purged) (9), Koy Thuon (purged) (6), Sao Phim (purged) (0), and Ta Mok (0). Mr. Koumjian explained that of the five members who were not purged, Ieng Sary and Son Sen were often away where Ieng Sary was on foreign trips and Son Sen went to the East Zone. As purges took place, this left Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, and Pol Pot, which shows that Khieu Samphan’s influence and involvement would only have grown over time. One expert noted that Khieu Sampan’s involvement in the purges was bureaucratically natural because his position to the party body responsible for keeping track of policy implementation coincided with Pol Pot’s shift of priority from economic rebuilding to ferreting out enemies. This shift to giving the highest priority to purge work was disseminated within the party by Nuon Chea. Mr. Koumjian yields the floor to National Co-Prosecutor Chea Leang, who will address the Chamber on sentencing. Ms. Leang requested to conclude the prosecutors’ submissions with a request for conviction of Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan for their participation in the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions as argued in the prosecutors’ closing brief. The prosecutors submitted that on the basis of the quality and quantity of the evidence this is the only conclusion that can be drawn beyond a reasonable doubt on the evidence. Ms. Leang then stated that the evidence demonstrated that these two Accused were leading ideologues, architects, planners, and implementers in CPK of one of the most cruel and complete systems of human rights abuses in any country in the 20th century. Once in power, the Accused systematically attacked the Cambodian population, who they had a responsibility to protect. In their minds, it was more important to stay in power at all cost and achieve their vision of a communist utopia than to protect the most basic fundamental human rights owed to all Cambodians in the Democratic Kampuchea period. In the three years, eight months, 20 days of their government, they set aside Cambodia’s obligations and international human rights treaties and intentionally attacked Cambodian fundamental human rights. Ms. Leang stated that the Accused deprived Cambodians of the right to life, physical protection, fair trials, freedom of expression and freedom of movement. Right to practice religion of their choice, family, right to marry, work, rest, access to adequate food and water, medical care, sanitation and housing, amongst other rights. Ms. Leang asserted that Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea believed they had absolute power to do anything they pleased to the Cambodian population and they did just that. They forced people to leave their homes and work in forced labor camps around the country in terrible inhumane situations, they separated families to dilute family power and influence, they forced people to marry and have sex against their will, they persecuted political opponents – former Lon Nol officers and civil servants, CPK cadres, Democratic Kampuchea ministry staff, Cham, Buddhist, and Vietnamese. Persecution was done through imprisonment, torture, extrajudicial executions and other inhumane acts, both in and outside CPK’s expensive security office network. Ms. Leang stated that this intentional system of abuse was implemented across every zone and office for the whole period the Accused were in power. If a person was lucky enough to live through the regime, the accused made sure they could not alleviate the conditions placed upon them. Ms. Leang stated that the Accused doomed the Cambodian people to suffer. The intensity of the system of abuse and the unflinching implementation by the Accused created in an atmosphere of fear and terror amongst all Cambodians, that they would be killed or harmed at any moment. This has left Cambodians with long-lasting physical and psychological harm that will remain throughout their lives. Ms. Leang stated that both Accused were at the apex of CPK authority and both made central, substantial, and critical contributions. Nuon Chea was second in charge, and Khieu Samphan was head of state, in addition to holding other roles in Democratic and CPK. At the highest level was integral to the development and implementation of these criminal policies. Both Accused abused their power to the extreme; for these men, the ends justified the means no matter how barbaric the means. Ms. Leang requested that no leniency in sentencing should be given to these men because of their age, education and mental capacity. Nuon Chea was 48 years old and Khieu Samphan was 43 years old at the time they were in power. Both had studied law abroad. These were smart educated men who knew the consequences of their actions. They had the academic and life skills to control people’s behavior. Nor should they receive leniency on the basis of their claims that they were under duress, unlike S-21 where the cadres were under pressure to kill or be killed themselves, these Accused were under no such pressure and they who developed an atmosphere of fear and terror. Nor should they be given leniency for cooperating with the ECCC. Neither has given any significant assistance beyond their legally required attendance at investigations and trial. Neither has shown any remorse, rather, they have both written books justifying their behavior rather than apologize for their actions. Ms. Leang elaborated that Khieu Samphan is of the view that he has done nothing to make him ashamed before anyone. Although Nuon Chea takes responsibility morally for what happened, he has refused to take personal responsibility for his own actions. Sadly, he has said he would make a revolution again if he were reborn. The fact that neither Accused has retracted their belief that they had the right to choose who lived and who died and how they lived demonstrates their absolute lack of remorse and absolute misconception of what a healthy society should be, one where difference is celebrated and not demonized. Such gross abuse of power and humanity must be strongly condemned by this court. The prosecutors submitted that only appropriate sentence is life imprisonment, by this, it will reflect the gravity of the crimes committed by the Accused and the central role they played. Ms. Leang acknowledges that this judgment and sentence will not bring back those killed during Democratic Kampuchea, nor will it un-harm those who suffered during this period. The prosecutors hope, however, that such a sentence will bring some justice to victims and will assist to deter the occurrence of these crimes in the future by showing that no person is above the law by virtue of status or position. Ms. Leang requested that when the Chamber issues the verdict, that the judgment contain details of all the charges, all the facts, and the basis for all the findings. In doing so, this judgment can provide a strong lesson for future generations and the government of Cambodia of the truth of the period and a clear understanding of the circumstance that led to these atrocious crimes so that they can never be repeated again. Judge Nonn adjourned proceedings until tomorrow at 9 a.m., noting that Nuon Chea will present his closing statement first for defense. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

My interview today with Radio France Internationale (in English; 5:30 minutes) on what lies behind the massive cuts to UNAMID in Darfur, what threats these cuts pose to Darfuris, and why the U.S. and Europeans acquiesced | https://soundcloud.com/radiofranceinternationale/sudan-darfur-security-situation-hasnt-improved-despite-proposal-on-unamid-drawdown-expert UNAMID has repeatedly allowed attacks on civilians to occur virtually before their very eyes and failed to investigate; see especially: "What We Learn of UNAMID from the September 2010 Tabarat (North Darfur) Massacre" | http://wp.me/p45rOG-Gi ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 SUDAN Research, Analysis, and Advocacy

Sudan is on the cusp of ending its long status as a pariah in Washington, and the African nation is bolstering its stable of lobbyists to ensure that it happens soon. The government of President Umar al-Bashir—which is listed by the U.S. as a state sponsor of terrorism—has hired Washington law firm Squire Patton Boggs LLP at a cost of $40,000 a month to lobby on its behalf as part of its accelerating campaign to ensure that President Donald Trump permanently lifts sanctions against the country ahead of a deadline next month, according to a filing with the Justice Department. Under an executive order signed by President Barack Obama in January, a temporary easing of sanctions against Sudan would be made permanent after six months if Khartoum sustains progress in five key areas, including helping the U.S. in the fight against terror, allowing humanitarian access and easing conflict throughout the country. That would allow fresh investment into an oil-exporting nation that remains one of the world’s poorest. “That would open a door to heaven between the two countries,” Maowia Osman Khalid, Sudan’s ambassador to the U.S., said in an interview. "I can assure you too that many major U.S. companies are knocking on the door right now. They are just waiting for the report in July.” Avoiding ‘Snap Back’ According to a letter included with a required filing on June 1 under the Foreign Agent Registration Act, Squire Patton Boggs will help Sudan “avoid ‘snap back’ of U.S. sanctions” and help improve the $84 billion economy’s investment climate. As part of the deal, the lobbying firm will help Sudan “with its economic development agenda” and “identify and implement strategies to improve Sudan’s investment climate,” according to the filing. Squire Patton Boggs spokesman Angelo Kakolyris didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the contract. The contract with Squire Patton Boggs isn’t Sudan’s first with a Washington firm this year. In February, Sudan hired Cooke Robotham LLC under the terms of the January sanctions waiver to help advise it as it restructures its debt. The contract was signed at a fixed fee of $300,000. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s formal recommendation to Trump on the sanctions, which must be made by July 12, requires weighing a host of political considerations. For starters, Sudan is one of the six countries on Trump’s “travel ban” list of nations facing restrictions on entry to the U.S., an initiative that has been held up by the courts. And Bashir continues to be sought by the International Criminal Court on allegations of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity related to the unresolved conflict in the country’s Darfur region. Sharing Intelligence At the same time, Sudan has shared intelligence with the U.S. and is a strategically placed ally in the fight againstterrorist groups even as it remains one of three countries listed as state sponsors of terror. The other two are Syria and Iran. Sudan was placed on the list in part for sheltering al- Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in the 1990s. While Tillerson hasn’t made a final decision, the recommendation from key aides involved in the process is that he support the lifting of sanctions, according to a person familiar with the decision who asked not to be identified because it isn’t public yet. Tillerson and the State Department must also weigh the likelihood of blowback if it goes ahead with plans to improve ties with Sudan while also proceeding with plans—expected to be announced Friday—to scale back new business links with Cuba because of human rights concerns. The U.S. Agency for International Development says Sudan has made progress in humanitarian access—allowing inhumanitarian organizations and the aid they provide—but the potential change is questioned by human rights groups. They argue that the U.S. may let Sudan off the hook because it’s seen as too important in counterterrorism efforts to risk reimposing sanctions and jeopardizing the burgeoning relationship. “The notion that humanitarian access is at acceptable levels is simply perverse, and completely expedient as anassessment,” said Eric Reeves, a senior fellow at Harvard University’s François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights. “Nobody who actually works in the humanitarian world in Sudan believes that access is at acceptable levels.” Khalid, Sudan’s ambassador, said the decision to include Sudan on the travel ban list was “understandable” and thegovernment is “exerting extreme effort” to meet its requirements. “We are doing good in this regard,” he said. Shaking Hands Other signs that the two sides are warming to each other have emerged recently. Sudanese newspapers reported in March that the head of the country’s intelligence service visited Washington on the invitation of Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo, meeting with him and then-FBI director James Comey. The CIA declined to comment when asked to confirm the visit. Trump and Tillerson shook hands with General Taha al-Hussein—a top aide to Bashir who has since been removed from his post, according to the Sudan Tribune—during Trump’s visit with Arab leaders in Saudi Arabia last month. In past administrations, staff would have ensured that such an encounter never took place. Because of the charges he faces, Bashir was dissuaded from coming to the event. Asked about the handshake, a State Department official said there had been no scheduled meeting between Tillerson and al-Hussein, and the interaction was “entirely spontaneous in the context of the summit.” Sudanese officials later circulated photographs of the two handshakes in an apparent effort to demonstrate how ties were improving. It will take more than an easing of U.S. sanctions to provide a big boost to Sudan’s economy. The country was ranked 168th of 190 nations surveyed on the ease of doing business in the World Bank’s annual “Doing Business” report, lagging behind countries including Zimbabwe and Madagascar. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Bloomberg News

Register for Event: http://hrwf.eu/our-events/upcoming/ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Human Rights Without Boarders