“A State of Being Alive but Being Dead at the Same Time”
Refreshed from the Khmer New Year holiday break, the ECCC resumed hearing the Civil Party impact statements. As difficult as it is to listen to, the heartrending anguish of the victims comes through clearly in their descriptions of their experiences under the Khmer Rouge.
First up was Thann Thim, continuing his testimony from April 2, 2015. Mr. Thann confirmed for Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer, Marie Guiraud, that, after his evacuation from Phnom Penh, he was in a refugee camp in Kirivong District. In 1977, he and his family (sister, mother, wife, two daughters and other family members) were put onto trucks and transferred to Tram Kak District. Due to over-crowding during the move, his nephew died.
Once they arrived in Tram Kak District, all the families were separated. Mr. Thann’s wife was put in a women’s unit tasked with transplanting rice; he was put into a fifty-strong ox cart unit which transported timber. His children were in a children’s unit. He could only see his children every ten days and, then, only late at night after the completion of his work duties between 7:00 PM-8:00 PM. Often the children were away scavenging for food, picking fruit, or asleep. In effect, he rarely got to see them.
Co-Prosecutor Vincent de Wilde asked Mr. Thann for more details about the second evacuation. The witness said the camp in Kirivong was along the Vietnamese-Cambodia boundary. The people were afraid of the Vietnamese who wore a skull symbol and “caused trouble along the border.” Then, in “likely in September or October, 1977,” when they could hear Vietnamese shellfire, all the “17th April people” in his village were gathered in the local pagoda. From there, “likely hundreds to thousands” were transported to Tram Kak District. The regime relocated them away from the border (the ‘base people’ were not moved), as they were concerned that the ‘new people’ might side with the Vietnamese and try to escape to Vietnam. They loaded 30-40 people onto each truck manned by only drivers. As “no one dared to try to escape,” during the journey, there was no necessity for guards.
When the convoy arrived in Tram Kak District, the people were categorized into ‘full rights people,’ ‘candidate people’ and ‘depositees.’ The newcomers were in the latter group. Thann Thim felt they were treated worse although he did not define exactly how other than the ‘17th April people’ were not trusted and were under constant surveillance. (Khmer Rouge were always ‘base people,’ never ‘new people.’) He reported that, as everyone worked, “the workload was similar,” and that everyone partook of the same insufficient food rations of watery gruel. Some people became sick and “bony” from the lack of food. If they could not work, their food rations were reduced even more. The only “healthcare” Mr. Thann saw provided was traditional medicine. Those who were ill were accused of being “psychologically sick.” Then the authorities “would follow” the maxim: “Keeping is no gain; taking away is no loss,” and the ill ones would disappear.
Although Thann Thim had been born in Som commune, his wife was from Kampuchea Krom.
Victor Koppe, Nuon Chea International Defence Counsel, quickly objected to this line of questioning stating that the Kampuchea Krom were outside this segment of the trial. Mr. de Wilde answered that the objection was repetitive, and that the Chamber had already responded that, as the Closing Order had referred to the Kampuchea Krom, “it is relevant to put the question.” Judge Fenz, enunciated the position of the court. She noted that the Chamber is “seized with a request to clarify the indictment with regard to the Kampuchea Krom,” and that a decision would be issued in due course. “Until then, (such questions) will be allowed especially since the question also refers to ‘17th April people.’”
Mr. Thann said that the leaders in neither Kirivong District nor Takeo District tried to search for Kampuchea Krom “unless there was a report on the matter and then they would research it.” (Sometimes the Krom would be identified by the color of their skin or their accents). The witness personally did not know about the exchange program swapping Vietnamese for Kampuchea Krom, but had heard of Vietnamese being sent to the border and of Kampuchea Krom arriving.
Kong Sam Onn (Khieu Samphan National Defence Counsel) objected to inquiries concerning execution of Vietnamese or Kampuchea Krom on the basis that the Co-Prosecutor was making a conclusion on the facts. He elaborated that “the civil party had not responded that the Kampuchea Krom were equated with being Vietnamese.” Mr. de Wilde clarified that he was simply quoting from the witness’s own OCIJ statement, not from his verbal testimony. President Nil Nonn overruled the objection. Thann Thim said that while he was still in Kirivong, he had observed that Kampuchea Krom who spoke with accents or Vietnamese (who also spoke “unclearly”) had “disappeared.” He did not know whether they had been killed.
Late one night, in 1978, just before Thann Thim was to go to sleep, he was called to go for a “meeting.” He feared for his life on this summons. He was tied up by militia, taken by“Ruos” to the Ang Roka office, and given a beating. They interrogated him, accusing him of being a Lon Nol lieutenant on the word of his six and seven-year old children. Mr. Thann denied that he was any more than a wood gatherer, but they just beat him more. He was put into a five by ten meter hall with wooden floor and wooden walls. He vividly remembers the “very bad smell” of urine and excrement emanating from the facility. He “felt (he) was going to die.” All the prisoners were in poor health, some very “bony” because the food ration was only “a small ladle of food.” The witness shared his ration with Im Sokar, a fellow prisoner who was in very bad shape. Another detainee, Pak, died of ill health. And a handicapped man who could not work well fell under “keeping no gain…,” and so was taken away.
Although the head count would vary, there were “at least 70 prisoners” at any one time in the detention hall. They were arranged in two rows; all were shackled except for children and infants who otherwise suffered the fate of their mothers. Sometimes prisoners would be “taken out” during the day due to overcrowding.
Mr. Koppe interrupted with the comment that “as interesting as the questions might be,” the prison conditions at Ang Roka are not part of this segment of the trial. The counsel requested the court’s guidance as to how to proceed. Mr. de Wilde differed: “Indeed, there is a link to Kraing Ta Chan and, secondly, a link with the cooperatives as it was the coop people who were arrested and sent to Kraing Ta Chan or Ang Roka.” Whilst leaving the line fuzzy, the Chamber allowed the questions, “as to facts on Ang Roka (but) not in detail.”
New prisoners arrived “sometimes once a week; sometimes once a month,” at Ang Roka. Female prisoners would come in groups of six to seven people; males in groups of four or five. Thann Thim could not testify as to what happened to prisoners once they were taken out of Ang Roka.
Neither he nor his fellow detainees discussed Kraing Ta Chan.
After Mr. Thann had been detained about three months and after his interrogation by “Ming,” he was let out to work. His job was to water the sugar cane and coconut trees. He did not know whether other cadres had come to visit with Ming or if Ming had a messenger. Thann Thim had seen the five widows who were the subject of the infamous “sweep clean” memo. But because they were only at Ang Roka one or two nights, he did not get to know them. There was one breast-feeding infant in the group. The witness had not known “Lay Kiet,” who apparently had been imprisoned for complaining about work, living conditions and insufficient food, and who was accused of destroying jack fruit shoots.
Mr. Koppe rose to request that the Chamber clarify what the process to be used when errors in translation were detected. (He had noticed that the dates differed between the Khmer and English translations on the current document used by the Co-Prosecutor to examine this witness).
Judge Fenz suggested that, for ease of reference, the party who finds a discrepancy make a request for correction.
Thann Thim did not know all of the prisoners at Ang Roka so he did not know if all of them were arrested for criticizing the regime or the conditions under the revolution.
Post lunch, Victor Koppe went looking for some specifics but got little from the witness. The counsel raised the issue that Thann Thim had testified on a prior occasion that he was arrested because his young daughter had stolen sugar cane and run away to avoid punishment. She had been forced to confess that her father had been a lieutenant in order to regain her freedom and return to the Children’s Unit. Mr. Thann said he knew this, firstly, because the men who beat him up told him what she had said, and, secondly, because he later asked his child about it. She told him she was given the words to say under threat so she said them, that he had been a lieutenant in Phnom Penh. The witness had no idea why the militia would feel that they needed a seven-year-old child’s confession in order to arrest him. He had already told them that he had not been a soldier. Thann Thim thought that the authorities had hesitated to conclude he was innocent of being a soldier, and that that was why they had continued to torture him “again and again” trying to force him to confess. (He had been interrogated and tortured by the chief of the militia on his arrest and interrogated again in prison). But the witness did not confess because he “was not a former soldier,” only a laborer who earned a living by gathering wood.
President Nil Nonn had “heard enough” and told Mr. Koppe to move on or the Chamber would give the floor to another defence team. Mr. Koppe defended that his questions went “to the heart of the existing accusation of there being a policy to eliminate Lon Nol soldiers,” and asked for “some leeway” in the matter. Judge Nil Nonn was blunt: “The civil party has responded clearly. You can’t force the civil party to give the answer you want.”
Thann Thim evaded disclosing how he had learned such arcane weapons knowledge as that the rifles the cadre carried were AK 47’s with a 30-bullet magazine and that the bullets were a unique, curved cartridge. He revealed no more than that he had asked soldiers about the guns before April 17th when he was still in Phnom Penh. He was cognizant of the MIKE Force and their skull emblem shoulder patch because he had met them while living on the border during the 1970 coup d’état when Lon Nol overthrew Sihanouk and the soldiers had come to his village. Neither did the witness divulge to the counsel’s satisfaction how he had recognized a Lon Nol soldier’s rank. He only implied that the officers had given this information themselves due to the “trickery used by the Khmer Rouge” who “wanted revenge on those people.” Those who had told the leaders about their previous positions had disappeared two or three days later, and Mr. Thim had concluded that they had been killed.
Thann Thim did not know why he was sent to Ang Roka and not Kraing Ta Chan, nor would he clarify why he thought prisoners were taken from Ang Roka to the Damriel Mountains, six or seven kilometers away, to be executed. As prisoners, none of them had discussed the reasons for their arrests with each other. They were “forbidden to talk to other people under this regime so were afraid to talk.” The witness did not say how he had come to know that “Khan” had been detained because he had thrown something resulting in a “veal” (translation: calf) breaking his leg.
The slogan: “no profit in keeping you, no loss in losing you,” was heard “everywhere” from the ‘base people’ and from Ming, the head of the detention center. But, as he was “living in darkness,” Mr. Thann had no access to radio so could not say whether it was used in propaganda broadcasts. The witness had heard people discuss the Revolutionary Flag, but he had never read a copy and did not know whether the slogan had been published in the magazine.
Thann Thim became frustrated when Mr. Koppe returned to the topic of the MIKE Force. He reiterated that they displayed a skull emblem and had come from Vietnam. Graphically, they were called the “Death is Tomorrow” unit. He adamantly denied ever being a member.
Mr. Thann said that he did not know Chao Ny before Chao Ny had approached him regarding becoming a civil party. The witness said that he wrote the application form himself but that Chao Ny took charge of tendering the complaint. There were two forms, on one of which he did not recognize the handwriting as being his (the one which stated that the Vietnamese were taken away to be executed). Thann Thim insisted that the village chiefs did not know the origins of people or who were Kampuchea Krom before the request was made for servicemen to identify themselves so as to return to their former jobs. But he did admit that the Kampuchea Krom had a distinct accent.
Arthur Vercken, Khieu Samphan International Defence Counsel, was intensely curious as to how Thann Thim’s weapons knowledge was acquired. The witness related that while he was in Phnom Penh, it was “quite normal” for soldiers to tell him the names of their guns when he asked them.
As this was the conclusion of Thann Thim’s examination, President Nil Nonn thanked him for his “assistance in ascertainment of the truth.” And then apologized for mistaking him for a witness rather than a civil party entitled to make a declaration as to the suffering he endured.
Thann Thim had endured much and it has left it mark mentally and physically. He outlined how it had been “miserable” to live through the ‘three years, eight months and twenty days’ of the regime. “The fact (he) survived meant (he) was reborn.” He was over-worked, starved, beaten, tortured and imprisoned and shackled so immobile on the floor that he had trouble relieving himself. He “prayed to the souls of (his) parents, sisters, guards and sacred objects to rescue” him from “the most miserable moment in (his) life.” Mr. Thann decried that he “did not deserve” what had happened to him, and wanted to know why there was “such injustice during the regime.” He termed it “a state of being alive but being dead at the same time.” The witness has survived, but he has suffered and his “body is now weak.” Thann Thim appealed to the court for justice, for collective reparations, and for an individual award as he cannot earn a proper living only engaging in light work. He concluded by wishing the members of the bench “happiness, good health, long life and good strength so they can resolve these issues and get justice,” for the victims.
President Nil Nonn “confirmed” for Thann Thim that he could not claim an individual award (only moral and collective reparations) as clearly stated in the rules of the court.
After a short break, Pech Chim was called to the stand. Born in 1941, Mr. Pech now lives in Banteay Meanchey province. He and his wife have four surviving children, one having died on the battlefield. He confirmed to the court that he has no conflicts with any party to the proceedings, and that he had taken an oath. Pech Chim had been interviewed several times by the Office of the Co-Investigating Judges at his home and once at the ECCC. His prior statements had been read out to him to refresh his memory, and, to the best of his recollection, they reflected the information he had provided to the investigators. Mr. Pech had discussed some issues (“but not everything”), with his duty counsel. Co-Prosecutor Dale Lysak lead off the examination.
Pech Chim was a cadre during D.K., and a high ranking one at that. In 1971, he became a full member of the party. Yeay Khom, Ta Mok’s daughter and the first Chief of Tram Kak District, was at his induction. His purview as a party member was to implement the party line and rule of the party. Som (now deceased), instructed him in the party disciplines. Teacher “Oeun” was not a member but only an assistant in the District. Because of his background as a teacher (a ‘petit bourgeoisie’), he could not join the party. Mr. Pech added that his duties also included such things as distributing rice to areas where production was insufficient.
Being Khmer Rouge was a family occupation. His brother, Pech Nou, was Chairman of the Communist Front from 1970-1975, and later was a commune head until removed and sent to work at a youth office. When the Vietnamese invaded, he fled to the Kampot forest and died there when he stepped on a land mine. Pech Kith (spelling) also had been head of a commune and, by late 1976, was working at the District level. Likewise, he fled into the forest. One day, he was found dead sitting under a tree. All of Mr. Pech’s three sisters and brothers died. Only he, the youngest, survives. Pech Chim digressed to declare that he lives by the principle to always tell the truth. After espousing that he “loves people, monks and intellectuals” (whom he feels are “the only one’s equipped to lead the country”), and that he wants the trials “concluded as soon as possible because every day (he) wakes up and only hear conflicts,” the President cut him off with an admonition to only respond to what is asked of him.
Kiev was Deputy Secretary of the party during the time Yeay Khom was District Chief, and worked “educating the people” in the district. Nouv was the member in charge of military affairs. As a member of the District Committee, Pech Chim attended meetings with commune chiefs and district cadres. These were called “regularly” and sometimes were convened on an “urgent” basis. Both Khom and Kiev would convene meetings at the same time for different communes.
The District Office varied location frequently. The office at Ang Roka was also used as a warehouse from which goods were distributed to the people. For six months in 1976, Pech Chim was Tram Kak District Secretary while Dorn was under him as Chief of the Tram Kak District Office. The witness admitted that he used the Ang Roka location more than other places, but messengers would convey letters to him wherever he was. Dorn worked most of the time at Ang Roka. Mr. Pech was often drawn away from the office by the necessity “under the Khmer Rouge to work like anyone else or you wouldn’t eat.” For example, he grew sweet potatoes. He opined that District Chiefs had no powers and only did what was instructed (whether calling meetings or when to do the harvest, et cetera). Pech Chim could not recall who had been Chief of the District Office before Dorn as “it was a very long time ago.” He denied that Phy was Chief of the District Office, but stated rather that the man was in charge of the medical service. He was handicapped in his legs so was not capable of heavy work. Pech Chim left the office alone. He returned after six months or so to see Dorn who wanted to go with him, but Mr. Pech counselled against this. Later, Dorn went to work at a cotton plantation where he died.
The testimony of Pech Chim was paused here until tomorrow in order to hear submissions on the Nuon Chea Defence Team’s motion to allow additional witnesses regarding the Kraing Ta Chan cooperative and security center.
Mr. Lysak proposed that the court consider “a couple of points.” Firstly, that this, again was a “last minute large request for additional witnesses,” but the Co-Prosecutor did think that the issue should be decided “on merit and not on procedure.” Secondly, in his view, there were two witnesses he concurred should be called as they appear to have exculpatory information for the Defence: a Lon Nol soldier who should be “a fairly quick witness,” and a ‘forced marriage’ witness. The latter has already been identified by a witness before the court as a perpetrator in charge of forced marriages in her commune and, thereby, is an appropriate witness in Mr. Lysak’s opinion. He put it in “the court’s discretion in reaching the truth” whether or not to hear any of the others in the Defence’s application.
The Co-Prosecutor claimed that the Defence’s argument that “the evidence is confusing so we need more witnesses” is not true. Mr. Lysak affirmed that the testimony of the cadres and victims “agrees on core facts:” that most who were detained were killed and not released; that this included children being killed; and that victims were suffocated and tortured. He argued that it simply is “not necessary to hear additional prisoners.” But, if the court decided to do so, “the two medical cadres were best.” The counsel asked the Bench to consider that, of the others, one was a victim of sexual violence but that the accused are not charged with rape. They do not even know if the two guards are still alive. Their names “just came up,” and it is unknown what they can contribute, in any event. The Co-Prosecutor also has proposed another as a witness but under the ‘purges’ section as the person had worked for Vorn Vet and been arrested with Vorn Vet. Mr. Lysak did not feel calling the husband in a forced marriage was necessary as the perpetrator could be called. Neither did he see that additional witnesses on documents were “a high priority” as they had “little to add on authenticity of documents.”
In a brief support of the application to hear the 15 witnesses, Arthur Vercken took the opportunity to say he was “flabbergasted to hear the prosecutor criticize hearing of witnesses when they have filed tens and tens of folders at the last minute.” Further, he accused the prosecutors of wasting time this morning by asking questions outside the scope of the trial.
It was an acrimonious end to the day. The Chamber reserved a ruling to be made in due course.
Court adjourned.