An Abstract

After hours of searching the internet for scholarly articles, browsing the bookshelves at my local library, and embarking on a quest to a local college's library to find just the right sources that deal with my topic, I have chosen 10 sources that were up to the job. Here I have a summary of pertinent information that each source provided. Later I will go into detail about each individual source, but for now go ahead and read this overview.

Now, almost thirty years after the Khmer Rouge genocide ended, Cambodia is well on its way to having a tribunal to put five of its top leaders on trial. If properly conducted, the Khmer Rouge tribunal is worth the millions of dollars put in and will provide justice to millions of citizens of Cambodia and in turn reform their court system and improve human rights.

In 2000, Walt acknowledges how Khmer Rouge leaders have sunken back into society. In 2003, as noted by Ben Kiernan, Cambodia and UN agreed to hold a tribunal putting only five top leaders on trial for the deaths of 1.7 million in Cambodia in 1975 to 1979. Now, common citizens should no longer be worried about their involvement in the Khmer Rouge putting them on trial. However, as Magistad points out, the delays in the ten year process to develop a tribunal can mostly be accredited to senior members of the Cambodian government who still worry the top leaders on trial will expose their former fellow comrades.

Walt exposes the lack of thorough education about the Khmer Rouge time period. The section is glossed over in Cambodian schools, and DC-Cam is working to remedy this. Already it has produced a book, titled A History of Democratic Kampuchea (1975-1979), to be distributed to its schools lacking any knowledge of the genocide. Yet inside this book, the disclaimer “The views expressed in this book are those of the author only.” This statement is necessary for a country where human rights are lacking.

As Duffy makes evident, the tribunal could be the key to developing Cambodia’s respect for human rights and the legal system. However, as Ramji points out, the current tribunal lacks any sort of reparations for the victims. Yet, historically, victims of mass human rights violations most desire the “truth” declared publicly about the guilty leaders. Kurlantzick agrees, citing a poll by the Khmer Institute of Democracy which found nearly 97 percent of Cambodians favored a Khmer Rouge trial. As Walt notes, a former Khmer Rouge member Meas Tung hopes the tribunal will distinguish the communist ideals of the Khmer Rouge, what many were misled to believe, from the atrocities committed. With such massive support, Kurlantzick warns of the devastating effects of a botched tribunal. Hook, who recently attended a day in court, was also concerned about the likelihood of this occurring. As the trial was dealing with setbacks, she felt the U.S. must offer money to force improvements in it because practically every Cambodian has a relative who was killed in the Khmer Rouge regime and deserves the justice of a fair trial.

Kiernan, the most scholarly of Cambodian experts, argues full-heartedly for a tribunal by declaring the mistakes of the United States with its relations to Cambodia. Yale’s Genocide Studies Program shows in its link to US Involvement an image of areas where 2,756,941 tons of bombs were dropped on Cambodia. Jones quotes a KR leader who defected, Chhit Do. Do said ordinary people literally sh*t their pants when the big bombs and shells came, and their minds froze up. The Khmer Rouge easily won them over and went along with the KR.

Last November the court room was first used to hear former Tuol Sleng leader Duch’s argument that he should be let out on bail. He did not succeed, but attendants, such as Sarah Colm of Human Rights Watch, were pleased to see his strong defense. Colm argued an ineffective defense would mean this tribunal was merely a show trial. However, Colm worried that those optimistic about the example the trial could set for the rule of law might be let down. Her group is concerned about the capacity and political will of its judiciary to be independent.

Everyone involved in the tribunal is concerned about the outcome and quality level of it. Ideally, citizens of Cambodia will benefit from this tribunal by getting justice for the atrocities committed. Also, its rule of law will develop and become a reality. The United States citizens should acknowledge their country’s negative involvement in the Khmer Rouge’s rise to power and become more financially and physically involved in the tribunal.

Thanks for reading! Comments are welcome, as always.