Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Human Rights

Amnesty International compiled a comprehensive report on the human rights situation throughout the world. You can download the 2009 report in its entirety here.

For ease of comparison I have excerpted the passages for Cambodia, Vietnam , Thailand, Malaysia , Singapore , and the USA.

It’s not pretty reading throughout. The violations differ in shades but not in severity. Judge for yourself. It is clear that another country’s human rights violations cannot be an excuse for your own country’s. But these reports clearly put in perspective the severity of violations everywhere.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have never read, seen, or been advised of a member of parliament of any of those countries except Cambodia going to another country’s legislative body to request outright interference in internal affairs. And just recently there was a panel discussion in Bangkok held by the Southeast Asian Press Alliance. The Nation reports on Sam Rainsy’s remarks there . No mention is made about Thailand’s or the other SE nations’ situation in that news report. Don’t they have any problems there? The AI reports tell a different story. But, of course, it becomes more newsworthy if a politician makes those statements, and Sam Rainsy never tires of repeating the same tag lines over and over again, especially abroad. But then one might keep it with another blogger’s comment:

Quote
My sense is Sam Rainsy is a mosquito to the Prime Minister. Background noise.
His Excellency Hun Sen has things sewn up rather nicely as he sees fit while continuing his rather successful high wire act of donations, deals and ethics.
Where there is no viable opposition, it is only human nature to take things in one’s own hands.
Unquote

Even the blog itself (DAS ) finds fault with his remarks.

Quote
Trying to saddle Hun Sen with the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge is fundamentally dishonest. Faced with an impossibly corrupt, U.S.-installed Lon Nol regime, a majority of Cambodians supported the Khmer Rouge at the time. Rainsy wouldn’t know that, though. He moved to France in 1965 at age 16.
Unquote

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

Denouncing human rights abuses is not a crime.
Committing human rights violation is.

Anonymous said...

KJE,
Your concept of best treatment for the victims of human right abuse is a lot closer to the uneducated than the civilized one.

Anonymous said...

This "barang", not like most, enjoyed abusing the victims.

KJE said...

4:32
Please stay with the article; don't try to insult based on your prejudices.

5:39
Please state which 'barang' you mean as related to the article.

If you want to make comments like on KI-Media, please do it there. You can have a different opinion and state it here. But stay on point.

Anonymous said...

KJE,
Might be the point is that you not know who is the victims of human rights abuses in Cambodia.

Anonymous said...

The topic is "Human Right". The content is critism of people for speaking up against tyrony.
What an irony !!!

KJE said...

5:06
It seems you don't get my point, evidently like many others. Did you read all the referenced reports?

What I mean is, 'Mu Sochua and Sam Rainsy, stop traveling abroad so much, condemning the government, and work in Cambodia with what you have and leave the government bashing to AI, HRW, and Licadho. They are better suited for the job. You want to be a parliamentarian or an extra-parliamentarian? Your forum is Cambodia!'

Anonymous said...

This is getting boring. let's have ab update on the real estate and economic situation in cambodia. with pictures. thanks

Anonymous said...

This barang complains that sometimes he gets confronted with the position that as a 'barang' he don't understand nor do I have the 'right' to talk about Cambodian affair.
This same barang uses quote that Rainsy wouldn’t know Cambodian affair because he moved to France in 1965 at age 16.
It is nothing but plain hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

KJE,
International intervention is not new.
As an example, on June 18, 1940, Charles de Gaulle gave a memorable speech, not recognizing the legitimacy of the Vichy government, to the French people over BBC Radio. Eventually, France was liberated by Allied forces.

You might not know, but today the world is getting even smaller lately.

You can have breakfast in Cambodia, lunch in Bangkok and dinner in Singapore in the same day.

Anonymous said...

KJE,

Remember the hearing scheduled by the US Congress on the human rights violation in Cambodia that you claimed it was not really on the agenda.

It did happen.

PM Mu did testify.

What do you do?
You criticize her that US is not the forum for elected officials.

What you do not know is Cambodian foreign ministry says speakers ought to include CPP officials. Ministry spokesman Koy Kuong said the hearing by the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, a congressional body that monitors human rights norms around the world, is "biased", as no one from the Cambodian government has been invited to testify.

It is nothing but plain hypocrisy.

KJE said...

4:59
Please read more attentively. SR moving to France was a quote from DAS.

5:29
An interesting point, but then it was wartime in Europe, right?

5:57
I corrected my mistake, didn't I? Koy Kuong said the hearing is biased because no government official was invited. That doesn't mean they approve of the hearing. Plus he might have overlooked the point of a foreign parliament.

The fact remains that in no other nation has a parliamentarian put his/her own country down as these two do.

Anonymous said...

If you disagree with DAS quote and use the quote in your post, that is silly.

Anonymous said...

To believe that Cambodian foreign ministry spokesman overlooked the point of a foreign parliament in case of US Congress hearing on the human rights violation in Cambodia is plainly ignorant.

KJE said...

10:25 and 3:25
Do you know how to read and understand English?

Anonymous said...

KJE,
Can you clarify more about the comment you made about Cambodian foreign ministry spokesman that "he might have overlooked the point of a foreign parliament."?

KJE said...

5:14
The government is almost always on the defensive when it comes to human rights. Yes, for a reason - and some people may be surprised to hear this from me. The government feels slighted over its human rights record because nobody ever points out the positive side of Cambodia's development. The government constantly states that there has been a vast improvement in the last quarter century, thereby indicating there is still room for more improvement. Human Rights Watch and AI always hit a raw nerve there.

Additionally, the spokespeople the government employs are a far cry from what you get in the West. They have really no idea how to sell their statements. They could do with a course in public relations. So the first thing Kuy Kong thought of was that the hearing would be biased as there is no government representation. This may be right in a different setting, but a foreign government never explains its policies before another country's legislative body. The proper forum for this is the UN, and there is a UN commission for that in place. Kuy Kong should have sat back and analyzed the entire situation before rushing out a statement that only muddled the affair. The US government has their ambassadors to bring their concerns over human rights up in bilateral meetings. If the US wants to attach strings to their foreign aid, they will do so if they deem the situation serious enough to warrant it.

Likewise the statement put out by the Council of Ministers in response to SR's talk at the SE Asian Press Alliance. This was a perfect example of a knee-jerk reaction. In PR terms it helped SR more than it helped the government. They really need a make-over there.

Anonymous said...

Cambodia is kill or be killed world.

Anonymous said...

For the abused, it is war time.

KJE said...

7:20 and 7:26
Surely, you exaggerate. I don't think you have been in Cambodia for a while. Did you read the other reports?

Anonymous said...

"kill or be killed world" is part of the quote from DAS that you requote.
That is plain hipocrisy.

KJE said...

10:31
See above what I quoted. Referring to the origin is what you usually do if it's not your own words. Please think first before you post.

Visitors