Addressing the issue of “Popular justice” in Cambodia

Between 2010 and 2018, 73 people have been victims of extra-judicial violence, more commonly referred to as “mob justice” or “mob killings” and these acts of violence resulted in 57 deaths and 16 wounded.¹ Those figures are considered by experts to be largely underestimated due to the low number of people registered by the authorities.²

The United Nations defines an “arbitrary execution” as the arbitrary deprivation of life as a result of the killing of persons  carried  out  by  the  order  of  a  government  of  with  its  complicity  or  tolerance or acquiescence without any judicial or legal process and an “extra-legal execution” as killings  committed  outside  the  judicial  or  legal  process,  and  at  the  same  time,  illegal  under  relevant  national  and  international  laws.³ According to the legal instruments in force, this definition includes, among many other qualifications, mob killings.⁴ Following its most famous theorists, the State has the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, because individuals make the choice to renounce the use of violence and rely on the state to use violence when necessary. The corollary of this principle is that the State must also intervene when citizens use violence against others.⁵ In a country governed by the rule of law, which is Cambodia, as proclaimed by the Preamble of the Cambodian Constitution of 1993,⁶ to make use of its legitimate violence, the country must respect the framework of the law, which applies to it and to all citizens and the judgements of the judicial power.⁷

A scene of mob violence. Comic by ODC team, drawn on 16 October 2019. Licensed under CC BY 2.0.

“Extra-judicial violence” is the name given to the violent acts of “popular justice” (TolaKar PracheChun), which are described as responses to actual or perceived offences by citizens and passers-by, often in reaction or immediate revenge for an event.⁸ Most of the cases concern traffic accidents, where the person responsible tries to escape (“hit-and-run”), thefts or even allegations of witchcraft or sorcery.⁹ For several decades, these violent acts have been repeated without seeming to have come to an end, despite repeated appeals by representatives of the international community, since 2002¹⁰ until now.¹¹

This phenomenon reveals the many weaknesses still affecting Cambodia and its judicial system. This street violence is the symptom of a “chronic social disease”, as a justice official once said,¹² that characterizes the very great defiance of Cambodian citizens towards their institutions. It testifies to the perceived inefficiency of the police in preventing and arresting criminals and delinquents, the justice in trying them and the prisons in administering adequate punishment.¹³ Moreover, the country’s judicial system is perceived as untrustworthy, believing it does not meet society’s expectations.¹⁴

For example, several road accident cases can illustrate this situation. Taking the form of a hit-and-run, those responsible for the accident prefer to escape from the scene rather than stop to assist the victims and expose themselves to the anger of the mob. Some go as far as to take shelter at the nearest police station, which serves as a bulwark against popular justice. Moreover, for the more affluent, in hit and run cases, the sentences ordered by the judge are often light, and compensation for victims is non-existent or very low.¹⁵ These cases have not helped to perceive the investigation police as anything other than a private service, which depends on the payment capacities of the victims and not as the public service that it should be free and open to all in an equal way.¹⁶

Thus, from Cambodian streets prospective, crowd violence appears to be the only way to ensure prompt, fair and proportional justice for the gravity of the offences.¹⁷ For a long time, the authorities have remained passive in the face of this phenomenon.¹⁸ This can be explained by the lack of means and political will to try to control crowds of up to several hundred individuals who feel they are pursuing a fair objective. In addition, in some cases, police officers may witness the scene, but prefer to remain passive either for fear of being attacked by an angry crowd, or because of the lack of training and ethics awareness, police officers will consider extra-judicial violence as legitimate.¹⁹

However, it is necessary to re-establish that crowd violence is a crime. The Criminal Code includes all crimes involved in acts of “popular justice” including homicide, torture and acts of cruelty, intentional acts of violence and threats.²⁰ Despite all the wrongdoings that can be blamed on an individual, in a country governed by the rule of law, the individual continues to be protected by the law. The Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia details the rights and duties of Khmer citizens,²¹ which recognizes and respects human rights as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights²² and all international human rights treaties.²³ An individual is protected by several fundamental rights, in particular equality before the law,²⁴ the right to life, the right to liberty, the right to security,²⁵ the right to be presumed innocent and to have a fair trial,²⁶ the prohibition of discrimination²⁷ and of any physical abuse against him.²⁸

According to the international human rights treaties to which the Kingdom is a party, the Constitution and the Criminal Code, the Royal Government of Cambodia has an obligation to prevent the occurrence of mob killings. Indeed, since the beginning of the 2000s, when extra-judicial violence had reached very worrying levels, the number of reported cases has gradually decreased with the stabilization of the political situation and the set-up of the market economy, which have made it possible to ensure a more peaceful environment in the Kingdom.²⁹ However, some of the latter cases are still the subject of massive media coverage, amplified by the relatively new uses of social networks on which images and videos of mob killings are widely disseminated, helping to strengthen their legitimacy in the eyes of Cambodians by normalizing violence as a natural response to anti-social behavior.³⁰ In addition, this popularization of violence appears to be an expression of a social malaise,³¹ caused by economic migration, nationalist tensions such as growing anti-Vietnamese sentiment and economic misery.³²

Peacekeeping and capacity building for effective justice and police are among the Government’s priorities, as enshrined in its Rectangular Strategy.³³ Efforts have also been made to search for and prosecute the perpetrators of the mobs killings: several people have been arrested in the course of investigations in two different extra-judicial murder cases.³⁴

However, there is still a long way to go to eradicate this phenomenon. Thus, as the recent report by the Office of the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights pointed out, the fight against this problem requires the establishment of a clear and enforceable legal framework, but also prevention and training, for both citizens and law enforcement officers.³⁵ For the former, the awareness of the rule of law is not yet fully acquired, and may be discouraged with the feeling of injustice emanating from the institutions. For many, the death penalty, although abolished in 1989, remains an adequate solution to punish criminals, particularly rapists and thieves.³⁶

The government, through its official representatives such as the Prime Minister³⁷ and the Minister of the Interior³⁸, has taken a public position to remind citizens not to use violence by themselves and to let the police act. The appointed spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice also said that the government was working on solutions to address this problem in cooperation with all partners involved, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Cambodia.³⁹ The Government insists on the use of education and the dissemination of human rights principles to the population as well as the strengthening of the capacity of the police forces.⁴⁰ In recent cases, which have marked public opinion, the government has weighed for an effective and quick investigation and trials.⁴¹

Thus, it appears that the implementation of criminal legislation, at the level of international standards, was only a first step in the fight against violence. According to the recommendations of the OHCHR report, the State must ensure the effective implementation of these laws in practice.⁴² The civil society, alongside with the public institutions, should raise awareness to help citizens as well as law enforcement and justice officials to understand that extra-judicial violence are crimes and should not be tolerated in a society committed to human rights protection. It also requires an increase in the resources made available to the police to intervene and prevent mob violence, but above all to investigate and arrest those responsible, in order to eliminate the culture of impunity that seems to prevail.⁴³