Dear Editor,
In response
to Peter Annear's letter (‘What is a legitimate defence for KRT
accused?', June 8), Mr Annear only provides half the story in his
attempt to discredit efforts of the defence teams at the Khmer Rouge
tribunal. He points out, quite correctly, that all accused have the
right to a fair trial before going on to say that they should limit
themselves to seeking to "convince the court of the innocence of the
parties".
But a basic component of a fair trial is that it should
take place before an independent and impartial tribunal. Under
international law, it is as proper for a defence team to raise concerns
as to a court's lack of independence and impartiality as to
deficiencies in the evidence advanced in support of the specific
charges. To suggest otherwise would make defence counsel complicit in a
potentially illegitimate, even unlawful, enterprise and would run
counter to the fundamental ethical obligation of all defence counsel to
pursue every lawful means to vindicate an accused's rights to a fair
trial in the full sense of the term.
By way of analogy, on Mr
Annear's crimped understanding of a fair trial, he would limit Aung San
Suu Kyi's defence counsel to simply contest factual elements of the
current criminal charges against her, leaving untested the systemic
grave deficiencies of Myanmar's politically controlled courts. I doubt
the Cambodian people would be interested in such a narrowly scripted,
stage-managed process in this country, and, as for Mr Annear's desire
for a settled historical record, neither Khmers nor the broader
international community will be inclined to accept the results of a
process tainted by unresolved allegations of corruption and executive
interference of the most serious character.
Meas Nak
Phnom Penh
Contact PhnomPenh Post for full article
Post Media Co LtdThe Elements Condominium, Level 7
Hun Sen Boulevard
Phum Tuol Roka III
Sangkat Chak Angre Krom, Khan Meanchey
12353 Phnom Penh
Cambodia
Telegram: 092 555 741
Email: [email protected]