RESIDENTS IN ONGOING PHNOM PENH LAND DISPUTE RECEIVE FINAL

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PHNOM PENH 001030 SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR EAP/MLS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PHUM KDEM CB SUBJECT: RESIDENTS IN ONGOING PHNOM PENH LAND DISPUTE RECEIVE FINAL EVICTION NOTICE SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED ¶1. (SBU) On December 25, the Phnom Penh Municipal Government issued a "final" eviction notice to residents of the Dey Krahorm area of Phnom Penh. The notice, signed by Chamkarmon District Governor Lo Yuy, instructs the approximately 130 remaining Dey Krahorm families to vacate the area by Tuesday, December 30 or face forced eviction. (NOTE: The notice states that 91 families remain in Dey Krahorm. Community representative Chan Vichet told Pol Assistant that the government notice did not count an additional 40 families that do not have recognized addresses for their residences. The lawyer advising the community believes the majority of these families are legitimate residents. END NOTE.) ¶2. (SBU) Chan Vichet said that the notice does not state when a forced eviction would begin. He speculated that the eviction would not happen until a later date, as the Dey Krahorm residents are still negotiating compensation proposals with the municipal government; community members met with Phnom Penh Deputy Governor Mann Chhoeun on the morning of December 29 and held a press conference with their formal response to the eviction notice on the same day. Mann Chhoeun would not comment on the case when contacted by Pol Assistant, other than to say that he was working with human rights NGOs to negotiate a fair settlement for the Dey Krahorm families. COMPENSATION AND LAND VALUES -------------- ¶3. (SBU) In 2003, the Council of Ministers issued a letter to the Phnom Penh Municipal Government to create four social land concessions for poor families, including one in Dey Krahorm. (NOTE: A representative of the Community Legal Education Center (CLEC) told POLOFF that although the Council of Ministers advised that a social concession should be created in Dey Krahorm, there was no evidence that the concession was actually created. END NOTE.) According to the Housing Rights Task Force (HRTF) and the Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO),in January 2005, 36 community representatives signed a contract to sell the land in the area to Cambodian construction firm 7NG Company. ¶4. (SBU) The company reportedly offered each family a house in Damnak Trayoeung village, located outside of Phnom Penh, plus 770,000 riel (about $193) and initial food supplies. (NOTE: According to CLEC, the resettlement area in this case is better than those offered in other eviction cases. A CLEC representative speculated that because the Dey Krahorm community had the potential to keep the land as a social concession, they had a stronger bargaining position from which to negotiate sales terms with 7NG. END NOTE.) Those that did not want a house were reportedly offered $10,000 in compensation, plus some food supplies. ¶5. (SBU) According to Lo Yuy, about 1,374 families relocated to Damnak Trayoeung. The remaining families state that the community members that signed the 7NG contract did so without their consent. They say that 7NG's compensation offer is insufficient and counter that they should receive $50,000 to $100,000 per family. According to Chan Vichet, these estimates are based on a 2008 land appraisal conducted by the Bonna Realty Group, one of Cambodia's largest real estate firms, which valued the land in Dey Krahorm between $3,000 and $6,000 per square meter. (NOTE: According to a Property Sales Manager at Bonna Realty Group, one square meter of land in Dey Krahorm is currently valued at an average of $1,800, given the fall in land prices. END NOTE.) COMMENT -------------- ¶6. (SBU) The issues behind the Dey Krahorm case are common in Phnom Penh land disputes. Dey Krahorm residents, and those in similar situations such as the Boeung Kak Lake community, are demanding compensation based on the market value of the lands that they occupy. However, their ownership claims to the land, and hence the legal grounds on which they can request compensation, remain murky. If the land was indeed granted as a social concession, the Dey Krahorm residents do not legally own the land. If the land was not established as a social concession, it would still need to be formally mapped and categorized as state public, state private, or private land before it could be bought or sold. ¶7. (SBU) Regardless of the status of the land, the legality of the sale itself is questionable, given that only a portion of the Dey Krahorm community authorized the sales contract. We do not have data on exactly what percent of recognized families initially supported the contract, nor on how split decisions like this should be adjudicated under Cambodian law. However, the Phnom Penh municipal government will likely do everything in its power to ensure that the contract is upheld; the sale provides a basis on which to evict poor residents from land that could be used for more PHNOM PENH 00001030 002.2 OF 002 productive commercial purposes. CAMPBELL