PROMINENT HUMAN RIGHTS LEADERS DISCUSS PROGRESS OF

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PHNOM PENH 000408

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EAP/MLS, DRL, AND EAP/RSP
DEPARTMENT PASS TO USAID/ANE AND USAID/DCHA/DG FOR MARIA
RENDON

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL CB
SUBJECT: PROMINENT HUMAN RIGHTS LEADERS DISCUSS PROGRESS OF
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

REF: 06 PHNOM PENH 1871


1. (SBU) Summary. Kek Galabru, president of LICADHO, a
local human rights NGO and Margo Picken, head of the Cambodia
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights (UNOHCHR),recently discussed the latest developments
as Cambodian civil society and the Cambodian government
discuss creating a national human rights commission. In
early February, five representatives of civil society and
five representatives of the government agreed that civil
society should draft the law providing the legal framework
for a commission. The NGOs have appointed a sub-committee to
refine the existing draft law and plan extensive public
consultations throughout Cambodia to discuss the role of a
National Commission. Galabru admitted that she thought the
government's current flexibility had more to do with the
coming elections than a change of heart on bettering the
human rights situation in Cambodia. Picken also voiced
reservations about RGC intentions but offered to help with
the establishment of the commission by bringing experts to
Cambodia to work with NGO and government representatives.
She warned that the commission -- to be effective -- would
need a much more supportive enabling environment,
particularly with regard to Cambodia's weak judiciary. End
Summary.

Cambodia and a National Human Rights Commission
-------------- --


2. (U) On February 7, after a four-month period of
inactivity, Cambodian civil society and government
representatives met to discuss the proposed national human
rights commission. Cambodian civil society was represented
by Kem Sokha of the Cambodian Center on Human Rights (who has
since launched a political party),Sok Sam Oeun of the
Cambodian Defenders Project, Young Kim Eng, the former
executive director of the Khmer Youth Association, Nhiek
Sarin of Star Kampuchea and Kek Galabru of the local human
rights NGO LICADHO. The Cambodian government was represented
by Prime Minister Hun Sen's advisor Om Yentieng and four
people from his human rights subcommittee. The two sides
agreed that Cambodian civil society representatives should
draft the necessary legislation with help from a Western
advisor.


3. (U) Although Cambodian civil society already has a
draft, the NGO reps named a subcommittee comprised of members
of their respective organizations as well as Yeng Virak of
the Community Legal Education Center (CLEC). The
subcommittee will continue to refine the existing draft and
conduct extensive public consultations throughout Cambodia to
gain grassroots support for a National Commission. The NGOs
have also agreed to move the process slowly and thoroughly.
They plan to disperse the draft throughout Cambodia's 24
provinces for comments as well as to explain to the public
what a national human rights commission will do. In
September 2006 when the issue of a national human rights
commission first was proposed by Kem Sokha, a one-year
process was envisioned to draft and pass the necessary
legislation and stand up the commission (reftel). NGOs
believe a three-year drafting and adoption process is more
realistic; RGC representatives believe that their side only
needs three months to examine the proposed legislation with
help from the Council of Ministers and the Council of Jurists
before adoption by the National Assembly. Galabru claims
that the RGC is being too flexible in its approach, which may
change after the April 1 commune elections. To pay for the
process, civil society plans to ask donors for help; although
not finalized, Galabru thought USD 100,000 would be adequate
to pay for drafting and dissemination of the law for comment
throughout Cambodia. NGOs intend to ask the local branch of
the Price Waterhouse Coopers office to manage the funds;
Galabru thought that the UNOHCHR office could help with the
technical aspects of the legislation but was open to having
the UN manage the funds as long as the process did not become
too bureauratic.


4. (U) Margo Picken voiced reservations about the proposed
commission, although her organization remains committed to
supporting its establishment. Given that the UN Human Rights
Council is considering the termination of country-focused
mandates like that of Cambodia, helping Cambodia establish a
national human rights commission may be an idea whose time
has come. On the other hand, Picken maintains that a
credible national commission requires an enabling

PHNOM PENH 00000408 002 OF 002


environment, particularly in the form of transparent and
independent courts. She sees little RGC progress towards
that goal; on the contrary, the RGC continues to consolidate
power and undermine the country's supposedly independent
institutions. Picken said that by leaving the drafting of
the required legislation to the NGOs, the government would
try to play off one NGO against another in the process.
Whereas Galabru wanted NGOs and RGC representatives to attend
regular meetings of the ASEAN and Asia-Pacific human rights
commissions, Picken's office has proposed a seminar where
experts could be brought to Cambodia to talk about what is
necessary for the establishment of the commission. Picken
also mentioned that a good precedent for the human rights
commission would be a new independent body that the RGC is
due to establish to monitor prison conditions as a result of
the January 2007 adoption of the Optional Protocol to the
Convention on Torture. If this new body proves to be truly
independent and effective, it could bode well for the
proposed national human rights commission.


5. (U) Comment. Although the new slower pace by which the
NGOs propose to draft and refine legislation for the national
human rights commission is a welcome sign, we agree with
UNOHCHR's view that without an enabling environment,
particularly in the area of judicial reform, a national human
rights commission may not be an effective instrument. NGO
representatives are not entering into the process lightly,
and have reserved the right to withdraw if they sense the RGC
is not living up to its end of the bargain. For that reason,
none of the prominent NGO leaders involved in the drafting
process has yet stated that he/she is willing to join the
commission once it is operational, as all have been let down
by RGC promises in the past. The prospect of an effective
national human rights commission that has broad grassroots
support, however, is tempting and the NGOs believe that as
long as the RGC has opened the door to that possibility, they
should push the door and pressure the government to live up
to its commitment. End Comment.

MUSSOMELI