By Julio A. Jeldres*
Originally Posted at CamboSastra.org
I was recently asked to comment on a paper entitled “The Scope of the Authority of the Extraordinary Chambers to obtain the testimony of High-Level Cambodian Government Officials and King Father Sihanouk” by Ms. Anne Heindel, Legal Advisor of DCCAM.
[1]The paper is a legal commentary on a legal document. As I am not a jurist I cannot comment on its argument, but as a history researcher, I would like to offer, with due diffidence, the following comments:
1) It should be pointed out, at the outset, that the whole premise about the desirability and feasibility of the ECCC obtaining the testimony of His Majesty the King Father in Ms Heindel’s paper is based on articles published in the local Cambodian press and, more in particular, on the request of the Nuon Chea defence team who are seeking an opportunity to question the King Father, and have said that:
“It’s hard to imagine a more uniquely situated individual to shed light on the events of Democratic Kampuchea.” They have highlighted the retired King’s brief role as head of state of the DK regime, his presence in Cambodia during much of the Khmer Rouge period, and the information he may have been privy to due to his “unparalleled access to its senior leaders and hierarchy.” Moreover, “Sihanouk is singularly capable of providing information relevant to the [prosecutors] allegations relating to the DK authority structure’.”
No comments:
Post a Comment