Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05CANBERRA1218
2005-07-18 06:55:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Canberra
Cable title:  

AUSTRALIA DOES NOT SUPPORT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tags:  PREL KAWC CB AS 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 CANBERRA 001218 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL KAWC CB AS
SUBJECT: AUSTRALIA DOES NOT SUPPORT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
FOR KHMER ROUGE TRIBUNAL

REF: A. STATE 126728


B. HURTADO-CROWLEY EMAIL 7-11-2005

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 CANBERRA 001218

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL KAWC CB AS
SUBJECT: AUSTRALIA DOES NOT SUPPORT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
FOR KHMER ROUGE TRIBUNAL

REF: A. STATE 126728


B. HURTADO-CROWLEY EMAIL 7-11-2005


1. (SBU) On July 11, Poloff delivered ref A demarche to
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) ASEAN, Burma,
and Cambodia Director Lynette Wood and Executive Officer
Gillian Walker seeking to gauge Australian interest in
establishing a Management Committee for the Khmer Rouge
Tribunal. Walker asked a few questions regarding the
structure and function of the Management Committee, such as:
whether the Committee would work with the Cambodian part of
the KRT or with the organization as a whole; whether the U.S.
would support funding the Cambodian government or the UN for
such an endeavor; and whether the U.S. had discussed the
proposal with Japan. Poloff sent these questions to the
Department (ref B) for guidance. Without waiting for the
response, however, on July 15, DFAT International Law and
Transnational Crime Director Michael Bliss informed us of
DFAT's decision.


2. (SBU) Bliss stated that, while the GOA strongly supported
the Khmer Rouge Tribunal (KRT) and shared U.S. concerns about
monitoring the KRT's development, the U.S. and Australia had
probably "missed their chance" to establish a Management
Committee if that was an option. The current structure of
the KRT simply did not allow for a Management Committee,
according to Bliss. The Australians would prefer to monitor
the KRT through their embassies in relevant countries abroad
and through the UN. Bliss added that the degree to which the
Committee was inserted into the KRT and exerted control might
be problematic and not the best way to project our interests.
Cambodian political will was key to the KRT's success, Bliss
emphasized, and donors might send the wrong signal if we
pushed to take over too much control of the process. Bliss
passed us a non-paper with the Australian response which is
reproduced in para 3. Australian officials were open to
hearing more concrete thoughts from the U.S. as to how a
Management Committee would function, but they stated that
their position would likely remain the same.


3. (SBU) Begin text of Australian response:

KHMER ROUGE TRIBUNAL

UNITED STATES PROPOSED MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

-- Australia thanks the United States for the opportunity to
provide our views on its proposed management committee for

the Khmer Rouge Tribunal (KRT).

-- Australia believes the KRT is the best mechanism we have
to address impunity for the gross violations of human rights
that occurred under the rule of the Khmer Rouge between 1975
and 1979. We are firmly and actively committed to the KRT
and to its success.

-- We share the United States' view that it is important to
ensure that the KRT meets international standards of justice,
fairness and due process of law.

-- However, we do not regard a formal management committee
as the most appropriate mechanism through which donors and
other interested States may ensure these international
standards are met.

-- We note that:

-- a formal management committee is not
envisaged in the 'Agreement between the United Nations and
the Royal Government of Cambodia concerning the Prosecution
under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed during the Period of
Democratic Kampuchea' (Agreement);

-- the Agreement expressly contemplates that
international involvement, including through the provision of
personnel and financial support, is contingent on the KRT
continuing to meet international standards. In particular,
Article 28 (which provides that the United Nations may
withdraw its participation in the KRT should the Cambodian
Government change the structure or organization of the KRT or
otherwise cause it to function in a manner that does not
conform with the terms of the Agreement) is designed to
provide international oversight, via the United Nations, of
the KRT to ensure it meets these international standards;

-- it is not clear how such a management
committee would relate to, or engage with, the work of the
Cambodian Khmer Rouge Trials Task Force; and

-- the proposal is likely to encounter
resistance from the Cambodian Government, particularly as it
is being raised a considerable time after the finalization of
the Agreement.

-- Although the KRT is a hybrid tribunal, it operates within
the existing Cambodian court structure as Extraordinary
Chambers. This domestic operation of the KRT (albeit with
international involvement and assistance) is distinct to that
of the Sierra Leone Special Court (SLSC) which operates
independently of, and has primacy over, the national courts
of Sierra Leone. We note that the SLSC Management Committee
was set up contemporaneously with the SLSC itself and was
expressly contemplated in the 'Agreement between the United
Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone on the
Establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone' (Article
7).

-- Australia is of the view that donors and other interested
States should closely monitor the establishment and operation
of the KRT, including through close cooperation with the
United Nations and Cambodian Government to ensure the KRT's
process is credible and legitimate. Australia looks forward
to working with donors and other interested States in Phnom
Penh, capitals and New York (as appropriate) to informally
discuss and monitor the KRT's progress, including its
conformity with international standards.

-- Australia would welcome a financial contribution by the
United States to the KRT.

End text.

STANTON