Journalists, academics and observers of all kinds are pouring into Phnom Penh as Monday's announcement of the verdict in Case 001 approaches. For a look of what exactly, from a logistical standpoint, one can expect from the proceedings on Monday, check out this article in today's Post. A couple of more previews with a little more colour to them:
- David Scheffer, managing editor of Cambodia Tribunal Monitor and former US Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues, assesses the proceedings at the tribunal thus far and what they portend for Case 002. He also pushes back against the criticism that the results thus far have not been worth the expense ($78 million by the end of last year, with roughly $87 million more budgeted for 2010 and 2011):
[A]n objective analysis of the cost of the ECCC trials would show that, compared to the expenses of local trials for single murders in advanced western legal systems, these trials for the torture and deaths of tens of thousands are relatively very cheap. It also is a fallacy to imagine that the funds devoted to ECCC prosecuting the surviving Khmer Rouge leaders, with international participation and oversight, would have been magically committed by foreign donors to Cambodia’s domestic justice system or development priorities in the alternative.
- AFP's Patrick Falby talks to witnesses and civil parties from Case 001 to get their take on Duch's statements of contrition:
- Finally, the Post's own Robbie Corey-Boulet published a piece in The Caravan magazine last month about Phung Guth Sunthary's father, Phung Ton. He follows the family's personal story while also offering more general background on the ECCC in what is one of the best long-form pieces to have been written about the tribunal.
Phung Ton at Tuol Sleng (courtesy of Phung Sunthary).
Top: Duch at closing arguments (ECCC/POOL).