A lawyer for the president of Cambodia’s main opposition party said his client has been found guilty of defamation and ordered to pay $1.5 million in damages to the government.
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia – A Cambodian court ruled Thursday that the country’s president Main opposition parties The court found the defendants guilty of defamation and ordered them to pay $1.5 million in damages to the government, according to lawyers and legal experts.
Opposition Candlelight Party leader Teav Vanol was not present for the verdict and is believed to be outside Cambodia. He has dual Cambodian and U.S. citizenship. His lawyer, Chon Kyaw Ngyi, said he would discuss with his client whether to appeal.
Thursday’s ruling Third conviction In less than two years, he was up against the top leadership of the Candlelight Party.
Cambodia’s government has long been accused of using the justice system to persecute critics and political opponents, and while the government claims to promote the rule of law in an electoral democracy, political parties are seen as a strong challenge to its administration. Cambodian People’s Party Some groups have been dissolved by the courts, their leaders imprisoned, and others subjected to harassment.
The lawsuit against Tiav Vanolle alleges he committed defamation by making statements criticising the backsliding of democracy under the prime minister’s government. Hun ManetHun Maneth was the son of the man who had seized power last year. Hun SenHe served as prime minister for 38 years.
Tiav Vanol acknowledged that Hun Manet’s leadership has been “more restrictive” than that of his father, and that democracy has been set back amid arrests of opposition politicians, activists and other critics. He made the comments in an interview in Japan in February.
He also acknowledged that he had claimed that security cameras had been installed on the road near his home to monitor his activities, but said his comments had been misconstrued as blaming the government for it.
The Cambodian government filed a lawsuit in the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in March, alleging that Theav Vannor had tarnished the image of head of government Hun Manet with his comments.
Article 305 of the Cambodian Penal Code provides that defamation means any malicious allegation or accusation that tends to damage the honour or reputation of a person or entity.
“This sentence is the latest in a series of convictions aimed at silencing the government’s political opponents,” Naly Pirolge, outreach director for local human rights group LICADHO, said after the verdict.
“As leader of the opposition, Van Nol made comments to journalists criticising his political opponents. How can that be a crime? Any hope for democracy and political freedom depends on all citizens being able to freely voice their concerns and criticisms of the country’s political leaders.”
Cambodia was widely criticized for human rights violations under former Prime Minister Hun Sen, including stifling freedom of speech and association, and the government led by his son Hun Manet shows few signs of political liberalization.
of Candlelight PartyThe only candidate who could have offered a worthy challenger in last year’s general election was barred from standing on technical grounds by the National Election Commission, a body and courts widely seen as being under the influence of the Cambodian People’s Party, which won handily.
October 2023, Tak Seta, The deputy leader of the Candlelight Party was sentenced to three years in prison for inciting discrimination on grounds of race, religion and nationality.
Another party vice president, Songchaiwas convicted of defamation and given a heavy fine in October 2022 for claiming that the June 2022 local elections were unfair and that the National Election Commission was biased towards the ruling Cambodian People’s Party.
Tev Vanolle has the right to appeal to the Court of Appeals and, if unsuccessful, to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s decision is final, and if he loses there, he must pay restitution to the state and a $2,500 fine. If he is unable to make such payments, the court may seize his property and order it to be turned over to the plaintiff. If there is no property to seize, he may be jailed while efforts are made to satisfy the fine.