By Amanda Chace
Victims of the Khmer Rouge
The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) have confirmed the inclusion of charges of genocide in the case against four former Khmer Rouge leaders currently in detention. Nuon Chea, known as “Brother Number Two;” Khieu Samphan, the ex-head of state; Ieng Sary, the former foreign minister; and Ieng Thirith, the former minister of social affairs, were informed of the additional charges during meetings in December 2009. The genocide charges refer specifically to the killing of Vietnamese people and members of the Cham Muslim minority group. In early January 2010, the Co-Investigating Judges ruled that they would not bring genocide charges relating to the Khmer Krom minority.
The four former officials are being investigated in Case 002 at the ECCC. The Co-Investigating Judges, You Bunleng and Marcel Lemonde, are expected to decide by September 2010 whether to indict the four former leaders and the final charges, if any. The genocide charges have been added to earlier charges, including crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the Geneva Convention. The only other case at the tribunal, Case 001 against Kaing Guek Eav, also known as “Duch,” ended in November 2009; he was not tried for genocide.
Although the mass killings under the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia during 1975-1979 are often referred to as genocide, academics have long debated whether the mass killings satisfy the legal definition. The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide defines genocide as the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such.” The ECCC accepted the Convention’s definition of genocide for use in trials at the tribunal.
During their time in power, the Khmer Rouge systematically executed or caused the death of those they considered ideological enemies. The genocide charges in Case 002 refer to the killing of members of identified groups, which would fall under the ECCC’s definition of genocide. However, there is some debate about whether the regime had a specific intent to destroy those groups or if the intent was to eliminate political opposition to the regime, which included these ethnic and religious groups. The definition adopted by the ECCC does not recognize the destruction of political groups as genocide.
In a filing to the Co-Investigating Judges, defense counsel for Ieng Sary asserted that the tribunal should use a “purpose-based” approach to determine intent in crimes of genocide rather than “knowledge-based” approach. A knowledge-based determination of intent would only require that the perpetrators knew their actions would lead to the destruction in whole or part of a defined group, while a purpose-based intent would demand that the perpetrators have the destruction of the group as a particular goal.
The exclusion of genocide charges in relation to the Khmer Krom, ethnic Krom from the Mekong Delta region in Vietnam, could complicate an already intricate trial process. The co-investigating judges ruled that the charges would not be brought for procedural reasons. According to the ruling, the facts and geographic areas cited by the prosecutors and civil parties’ request for investigation were not included in either the introductory or supplemental submissions by the prosecutors, which is a requirement for expanding the investigation. The lawyers for the Khmer Krom civil parties are expected to appeal the decision.
by Amanda Chace
The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) have confirmed the inclusion of charges of genocide in the case against four former Khmer Rouge leaders currently in detention. Nuon Chea, known as “Brother Number Two;” Khieu Samphan, the ex-head of state; Ieng Sary, the former foreign minister; and Ieng Thirith, the former minister of social affairs, were informed of the additional charges during meetings in December 2009. The genocide charges refer specifically to the killing of Vietnamese people and members of the Cham Muslim minority group. In early January 2010, the Co-Investigating Judges ruled that they would not bring genocide charges relating to the Khmer Krom minority.
The four former officials are being investigated in Case 002 at the ECCC. The Co-Investigating Judges, You Bunleng and Marcel Lemonde, are expected to decide by September 2010 whether to indict the four former leaders and the final charges, if any. The genocide charges have been added to earlier charges, including crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the Geneva Convention. The only other case at the tribunal, Case 001 against Kaing Guek Eav, also known as “Duch,” ended in November 2009; he was not tried for genocide.
Although the mass killings under the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia during 1975-1979 are often referred to as genocide, academics have long debated whether the mass killings satisfy the legal definition. The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide defines genocide as the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such.” The ECCC accepted the Convention’s definition of genocide for use in trials at the tribunal.
During their time in power, the Khmer Rouge systematically executed or caused the death of those they considered ideological enemies. The genocide charges in Case 002 refer to the killing of members of identified groups, which would fall under the ECCC’s definition of genocide. However, there is some debate about whether the regime had a specific intent to destroy those groups or if the intent was to eliminate political opposition to the regime, which included these ethnic and religious groups. The definition adopted by the ECCC does not recognize the destruction of political groups as genocide.
In a filing to the Co-Investigating Judges, defense counsel for Ieng Sary asserted that the tribunal should use a “purpose-based” approach to determine intent in crimes of genocide rather than “knowledge-based” approach. A knowledge-based determination of intent would only require that the perpetrators knew their actions would lead to the destruction in whole or part of a defined group, while a purpose-based intent would demand that the perpetrators have the destruction of the group as a particular goal.
The exclusion of genocide charges in relation to the Khmer Krom, ethnic Krom from the Mekong Delta region in Vietnam, could complicate an already intricate trial process. The co-investigating judges ruled that the charges would not be brought for procedural reasons. According to the ruling, the facts and geographic areas cited by the prosecutors and civil parties’ request for investigation were not included in either the introductory or supplemental submissions by the prosecutors, which is a requirement for expanding the investigation. The lawyers for the Khmer Krom civil parties are expected to appeal the decision.
Related posts:
- International Co-Investigating Judge of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia Accused of Bias
- Sudan’s President May Still Face Charges of Genocide
- Joint Criminal Enterprise in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
- Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC)
- Ethiopian Court Sentences 33 Opposition Members to Life Sentences and Five Leaders to Death
About jshore@hrbrief.org
