Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen's regime has supporters overseas, but their voices are sometimes drowned out by his noisy critics. Photo: AFP / Tang Chhin Sothy

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen thought that by bringing charges of defamation against me in Paris he could silence criticism of his regime from abroad. The venture has had the opposite effect, with the court rejecting his claims on October 10.

The prime minister brought the case against me in response to my public statements that he was responsible for the deaths of Cambodian trade-union leader Chea Vichea in 2004 and former police chief Hok Lundy in 2008.

Hun Sen claimed defamation, but the court acquitted me on the basis that my claims were part of a “major general-interest debate over respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms” in Cambodia.

So there is now a legal judgment that sets down in black and white that there is a legitimate public interest defense for making carefully researched allegations about Hun Sen’s regime. The prime minister knows that he needs to cut his losses and has said that he will not appeal the verdict.

Of course, it has long been impossible to tell the truth about Cambodia from inside the country without provoking a backlash. Son Chhay, vice-president of the opposition Candlelight Party, has been convicted and fined a punitive US$800,000 for stating the obvious truth that the local communal elections held in June were not free but stacked in favor of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party.

Such an amount is obviously designed to act as a financial deterrent to criticism. No doubt Hun Sen hoped to intimidate others abroad by bringing a case against me, but an independent court had other ideas.

State terrorism

The French defamation case obliged the Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris to peer deeply into the dark recesses of Cambodian political power. These are the first words I said to the court: “I ask you to imagine yourself in a country where there is no liberty of expression, where anyone who dares to speak the truth ends up dead, in prison or in exile.”

Examples of political assassination in Cambodia are legion, with many instances that can be described as state terrorism. The method of operation is usually the same: Professional killers with their faces covered gun down their victims in cities in broad daylight, and calmly leave the scene as if nothing had happened.

Numerous political opponents of the regime, or people whom it finds inconvenient, have been eliminated in this way: Buddhist monks who have become too active, trade-union leaders who are too dangerous, political analysts who are too critical, defenders of the environment who are too militant, and even a mistress of the prime minister who aroused the jealousy of Hun Sen’s wife. For this case, see the French article in L’Express dated October 7, 1999, “A crime of state.”

Many of my colleagues and supporters have also been eliminated since I founded the first party to oppose the current regime in 1995. No one has ever been found responsible for ordering these crimes, carrying them out or being an accomplice.

I have been fighting against this culture of violence and impunity for almost 30 years. It’s a case of David versus Goliath. Struggling against criminals would normally mean having the police and the justice system on your side. In Cambodia they are against you – the culprits, the police and the judges are in league together.

Fiction and truth

In parallel to this defamation trial, a French investigating judge has ordered the trial before the Cour d’Assises of two heads of Hun Sen’s bodyguard unit for an attempt to assassinate me in Phnom Penh in 1997. The French justice system is prevented, for the moment, from accusing Hun Sen himself because of his immunity as a head of government.  

Has there ever been a case of a ruling prime minister taking legal action against his main opponent in the courts of a third country? Has there ever been a defamation trial where the plaintiff is himself accused of having tried to kill the defendant? It would be comic except for the human cost of the alleged assassination attempt.

Actions speak louder than words. The responsibility of Hun Sen’s entourage and Hun Sen himself has been recognized by the French justice system through its warrant of December 30, 2021, which accuses two leaders of his bodyguard unit of being involved in the 1997 grenade attack.

This decision is a historic event as it is the first time that a legal decision has ended the impunity for political crimes in Cambodia committed since the end of the Khmer Rouge regime in 1979.

A product of the Khmer Rouge years is that Cambodia’s diaspora is spread widely around the world. This means that it will never be possible for any Cambodian government to create a false international image for itself. There will always be people who are willing and able to criticize an authoritarian system back home, whether the prime minister is Hun Sen, his son and intended successor Hun Manet, or anyone else.

It will never be possible to turn Cambodia into a North Korea–style hermit kingdom as Hun Sen would prefer. Reality will always intrude on attempts to construct an artificial Cambodian reality. The only way to escape this contradiction is for Cambodians to work together rather than trying to silence one another. Hun Sen should play his part by returning Cambodia to the path of democracy in time for national elections in July 2023.

Sam Rainsy has been a leader of Cambodia’s democratic opposition since serving as finance minister in 1993-1994.