“There was no plan to purge Cham people”, former Khmer Rouge cadre testifies

Witness Ban Siek, who had started his testimony yesterday, provided information regarding a rebellion that occurred in Chamkar Leu. He denied that there had been a plan to commit genocide in the Central Zone and repudiated any involvement in the killing of Cham people during his time as a district chief.

 

Rebellion in Chamkar Leu

At the beginning of the session, the Trial Chamber Greffier confirmed the presence of all parties, with the exception of accused Nuon Chea who followed the hearings from the holding cell.

Next, the testimony of yesterday’s Ban Siek continued. Duty Counsel was given the floor. He stated that during the proceedings, he would take notes on his laptop. This request was granted. The floor was then given to the defense team for Nuon Chea.

International Nuon Chea Defense Counsel Victor Koppe started his line of questioning. He stated that his questioning would focus on the rebellion in Krouch Chhmar after May 1978. However, first he wanted to know whether in the same district there had also been a rebellion three years earlier, in Svay Khleang or Trea Village. Mr. Siek denied knowledge of any rebellion before his arrival there. There was a rebellion that was initiated by the Khmer people and not the Cham people after his arrival.

Mr. Koppe turned to Sector 42 in the time period of 1976 to 1977 and started reading an excerpt from a telegram signed by Ke Pauk, dated April 1976.[1] This telegram was directed to Pol Pot and informed him about activities of “the enemy” in the North Zone. It further alleged that former soldiers and Cham people, in cooperation with cooperative chiefs, had started to rebel in Chamkar Leu. Mr. Koppe asked whether the witness was aware of such activities. The witness denied knowledge. Mr. Koppe pressed on and asked whether the witness was aware of any activities such as burning forests, which had been mentioned in the telegram, which the witness denied.

Mr. Koppe turned to the topic of the purge of the North Zone. In one of the Written Record of Interview, the witness had stated that those who were purged were “affiliated with the CIA.” Mr. Siek responded that he learned this through “other brothers like Oeun”, who said that Koy Thuon was the head of the CIA. The zone had therefore to be cleansed from the top to the bottom. Mr. Koppe asked what Oeun meant that Koy Thuon was the head of the CIA. Mr. Siek replied that Koy Thuon had said in his confession that he was the head of the CIA. Mr. Koppe inquired what Mr. Siek meant when he said that Sao Phim was the head of the KGB in the East, as he had indicated in his Written Record of Interview. At this point, Deputy Co-Prosecutor Dale Lysak requested that the ERNs and document numbers would be provided.

Mr. Koppe gave the respective references.[2] Mr. Siek replied that he did not really understand the matter. “They mentioned the KGB and the CIA “who served the Americans and the ‘Yuon’.” Mr. Koppe inquired whether when being accused of being part of the KGB or the CIA, the person was rather accused of collaborating with the Vietnamese and the Americans.

Mr. Koppe then asked who the predecessor of Oeun was in Sector 42. Mr. Siek replied that he did not know. Mr. Koppe asked whether the name Thol sounded familiar. The witness replied that he Thol was from Bat Sna village. Asked whether this person was the Sector 42 chief until his arrest in 1977, Mr. Siek answered that he did not know.
Mr. Koppe then asked whether he recalled another Oeun, the chief of division 310, and not the Oeun who was Secretary of Sector 42. Mr. Siek denied this.

Mr. Koppe asked what Mr. Siek remembered about Koy Thuon, what his functions were and why he was arrested. Mr. Siek replied that he could not recall. He remembered that Koy Thuon was chief of the Central Zone and later on minister of commerce. Mr. Siek did not know about any reasons for his arrest.

Mr. Koppe turned to Ke Pauk’s son, Ke Pich Vannak.[3] This person talked about chairman of division 310 and Division 1, Oeun. Mr. Koppe inquired whether the
witness knew someone who was chairman of Division 1 and formerly a messenger of Koy Thuon, which Mr. Siek denied.

Mr. Koppe then referred to the testimony of witness Sem Hoeun, who had been a combatant.[4] The witness stated that he hid weapons in Kampong Cham and handed them over to Thol. Mr. Koppe inquired whether this sounded familiar, which Mr. Siek denied. Mr. Koppe pressed on and asked whether Oeun, Koy Theun or someone else ever told him about rebellions in his area. Mr. Siek replied that he was told that the Old North Zone “was full with CIA agents.” He did not know about their specific activities.

Mr. Koppe asked whether he heard them attacking an airport, closing down a radio station and sending troops to Phnom Penh, which Mr. Siek confirmed. He heard them hiding ammunition under their shirts and going to Phnom Penh. “However, they were all arrested.” He heard that this rebellion was initiated by Koy Thuon to overthrow Pol Pot. He could not give more detail about this rebellion.

 

Resistance Movements

Mr. Koppe then turned to the entity called the Labor Party. In Mr. Siek’s Written Record of Interview, he had talked about the Workers’ Party and had said that chaos was stirred up because of Communist Party of Democratic Kampuchea, the CIA, and the Workers’ Party.[5] He had stated that Khmer cadres had been trained in Vietnam were part of the Labor Party. Mr. Koppe inquired what the witness’s understanding of this party was and who members were. Mr. Siek replied that KGB agents were members of the workers’ party of Indochina. Their leader was Sao Phim. He did not know what subsequently happened, but heard that he committed suicide in the East Zone, which contributed to the rebellion of people in the East Zone. Mr. Koppe asked whether Mr. Siek knew other prominent members of the workers’ party, which Mr. Siek denied. Ke Pauk was a member of the workers’ party. The party was set up in 1977 or 1978. Ke Pauk left the Workers’ Party to join the Communist Party. Ke Pauk had been a member of the Workers’ Party since the time that he “fought in the jungle”.

In his Written Record of Interview, Mr. Siek had indicated that Moeun, wife of Pech Chim, would be able to give more detail about the Workers’ Party. Mr. Koppe inquired why Moeun could give more information. Mr. Siek replied that this was the case, because Moeun was “someone important”. Her husband told her many things. He had not seen Moeun for several years.

Mr. Koppe then asked whether Mr. Siek could tell the Court who Heng Samrin was. Mr. Siek replied that Heng Samrin was commander of the East Zone army and Chea Sim was head of Sector 22. Mr. Koppe inquired when Heng Samrin became the head of these forces, which Mr. Siek did not know. He did not know anything else about him. Mr. Koppe asked whether Mr. Heng Samrin had a sister who was married to Sector 21 Secretary Sot, which Mr. Siek denied.

Mr. Koppe referred to the son of Ke Pauk’s statement.[6] He had said that Heng Samrin was chairman of Sector 20 in the East Zone. Mr. Siek said that he did not know.

The President Nil Nonn interjeted and stated that Mr. Koppe did not give specific ERNs after having objected to many questions yesterday. Mr. Koppe repeated the references. Ke Pauk’s son had recounted that the purges took place in two phases. Heng Samrin had been informed about the order to arrest him, after which he disappeared. Mr. Koppe asked whether Mr. Siek had heard about this, which Mr. Siek denied. Turning to his last question about Heng Samrin, Mr. Koppe asked whether Heng Samrin had been a member of the Workers’ Party. Mr. Siek replied that he did not know.

 

The role of Chea Sim and Heng Samrin

Moving on to Chea Sim, Mr. Koppe inquired about his statement that Chea Sim was chief of Sector 22 and wanted to know how Mr. Siek knew this. Mr. Siek replied that, when he was moved to Krouch Chhmar, he was told that Chea Sim had betrayed the party. He therefore had to restructure the zone. Mr. Koppe asked whether it was possible that Mr. Siek had made a mistake when stating that Chea Sim was chief of Sector 22, since it seemed that Chea Sim had been the chief of Sector 20 instead. The President interjected and instructed the witness not to answer this question, since this was a leading question. Mr. Lysak conferred with the President, since Mr. Koppe would have to provide evidence. Mr. Koppe replied that Chea Sim had stated in his own statement that he had been chief of Sector 22.[7] When he started giving the references for this, the President interjected and stated that Mr. Koppe should not use leading questions in the courtroom. “I see you laughing. Are you making a mockery of me?” Mr. Koppe replied that this was not the case, but that he was just giving references.[8] Mr. Lysak stated that this quote showed that the person was a member of the Sector committee, and not of the standing committee.

Mr. Koppe said that this quote showed that Heng Samrin was in Sector 20 and asked the witness whether this was the case. Mr. Siek replied that he did not know anything about this. Son Sen had said that Samrin had been secretary of Sector 22. He did not know whether Heng Samrin was secretary of Sector 20. Mr. Koppe then asked whether the witness was sure that Krouch Chhmar was part of Sector 22. Mr. Siek replied that this is what he heard during that period. Mr. Koppe said that there was substantial evidence that Krouch Chhmar was actually in Sector 21 and inquired whether Mr. Siek knew who was in charge of Sector 21, which Mr. Siek denied. Mr. Koppe then asked whether Mr. Siek had ever heard of someone called Ouk Bunchhoeun. Mr. Siek denied this.

Turning back to Chea Sim, Mr. Siek inquired about his statement that Chea Sim fled to Vietnam. Mr. Koppe wanted to know how Mr. Siek had acquired this knowledge. The witness replied that when “they told me the whole story” when he was assigned to Krouch Chhmar. Mr. Koppe inquired whether Mr. Siek knew whether Chea Sim was part of the Workers’ Party like Sao Phim. At this point, Mr. Lysak interjected and made an observation. He stated that the Workers’ Party was the name of the Communist Party of Kampuchea from 1960 until 1972. Next to this, there was a Workers’ Party was a “fictional product” of S-21 confessions. Mr. Koppe replied that he was not sure whether this was an imagined product. Mr. Koppe asked whether Sao Phim fled in 1978. Mr. Siek replied that when he went there, they spoke about the Workers’ Party in relation to the Indo-China relations.

Mr. Koppe stated that Mr. Siek had said that the situation was in chaos when he arrived in the East Zone, because there were many different groups.[9] Mr. Koppe inquired what Mr. Siek meant with this. Mr. Siek replied that the situation was tense upon his arrival, since Chea Sim and Heng Samrin had formed the Salvation Front. He heard from others that they had to be vigilant with the militant force. When he arrived, there was a rebellion by the mobile group. This took place around ten days after his arrival. Subsequently, the purge was carried out. Mr. Koppe asked whether the people who carried out were different to those who were in the National Salvation Front, which Mr. Siek confirmed. There were no other groups when he arrived. Mr. Koppe asked whether the group that initiated the rebellion and the National Salvation Front were interconnected, which Mr. Siek confirmed. It was said that “the rebellious people were the KGB”. It seemed that people were not satisfied with the leadership of the Communist Party of Kampuchea.

Mr. Koppe then asked whether he was aware of fighting between Vietnamese forces and forces at the borders of Vietnam. Mr. Siek replied that he “knew it for sure”, since there were many dead soldiers who were transported back. He could not give any further detail.

Mr. Koppe stated that Ke Pauk’s son had talked about 30,000 dead Khmer Rouge soldiers because of the fighting at the border. Mr. Siek replied that he saw many dead and wounded soldiers who were transported by hundreds of trucks every day. He did not know any specific figure.

At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.

 

Conflicts between the Khmer Rouge and Opposition Groups

After the break, the floor was again given to Mr. Koppe. Mr. Koppe turned back to the number of 30,000 Khmer Rouge soldiers who had been killed in combat. Pich Vannak had stated that the bodies of the dead soldiers were taken to be cremated at Buong Snay kiln in Kampong Cham province while Ta Pauk was in charge of the respective kiln there.[10] Mr. Koppe asked whether this sounded familiar. Mr. Siek denied this.

Mr. Koppe returned to Mr. Siek’s statement.[11] Mr. Siek had mentioned the Serey Kar Party. Mr. Koppe inquired what this meant. Mr. Siek replied that Oeun had told him that this party and the CIA were the “same thing” and could also be referred to as the White Khmer or Khmer Sor.

Mr. Koppe turned to Mr. Siek’s Written Record of Interview in which Mr. Siek had indicated that there was another rebellion in Krouch Chhmar a week before the Vietnamese arrived.[12] Mr. Koppe asked to ascertain whether Mr. Siek had talked about one rebellion or two. Mr. Siek replied that there was a rebellion of the mobile unit one week after he arrived. Then he was transferred to Sector 35, where there was also a rebellion. Mr. Koppe inquired whether it was not correct that there was a second rebellion at Krouch Chhmar. Mr. Siek replied that there was only one rebellion. When the army arrived, there were armed conflicts, which gave rise to an evacuation of the inhabitants.

Mr. Koppe asked whether his understanding was correct that the witness never met Sim or An before 1979, which Mr. Siek confirmed. “I only met him after the arrival of the Vietnamese army.” Mr. koppe then asked whether there was a particular reason that Mr. siek was never in a position to meet Ta An or Ta Sim, despite the fact that Ta An was Ke Pauk’s deputy. Mr. Siek replied that he never attended any meetings in Ta Keu. Mr. Koppe asked whether it was unusual that Mr. Siek had never met Ta An, or whether that was something that was “completely understandable.” Mr. Siek replied that he assumed his duties for approximately one year and only spent only two or three months in Krouch Chhmar. He never attended meetings in Sector 22. As for Son Sen, Mr. Siek recounted that he had meetings with him while being in the districts. There was another meeting in which Son Sen was establishing biographies and told him that one of his brothers had been discovered. However, Son Sen told him not to be afraid and that he should go back to work.

Mr. Koppe then asked how long it took for Son Sen to assume that particular position as chief of the East Zone after Sao Phim’s death on the 3^rd of June 1978. Mr. Siek replied that Son Sen was the commander in chief. “It is possible that that was five or six months before.” when he had gone there, Rin had told him that Son Sen was the commander in chief. Mr. Koppe inquired why Sao Phim and Ke Pauk did not like each other, as indicated in one of his Written Record of Interview. Mr. Siek replied that there were no problems between them when they were in the Zone. At the battlefield, there would be conflicts.

Mr. Koppe then asked when Mr. Siek had seen Son Sen physically present in the East Zone the last time. Mr. Siek replied that he saw him at a study session. Mr. Koppe inquired what Oeun told Mr. Siek about Son Sen. Mr. Siek replied that Oeun did not tell him anything. He spoke about him after the battles. He told them that they were withdrawn from their duties.

Mr. Koppe turned to the topic of the rebellion. Mr. Koppe asked how big the rebel group was that was subsequently detained on the island. Mr. Siek replied that “it was said that there had been a rebellion hashed from the top.” He did not know any particular figures. Mr. Koppe said that he had spoken about 80 people in one of his statement. Pressed on about an approximate number, Mr. Siek said that he did not have any accurate recollection. He saw between ten and 20 people from a distance and left shortly after. Asked about the nature of the rebellion, Mr. Siek answered that he could not remember very well. Forces from the Center went to that location and they saw that there had been a rebellion, while the situation was very tense. The forces from the Center surrounded the rebels and a report was sent. Mr. Koppe asked whether Mr. Siek recalled hearing gunfire or artillery, which Mr. Siek denied. However, his assistant was wounded by gunshots. Since he was not stationed at a fixed location, he did not know more.

Mr. Koppe asked whether he was aware what kind of military weapons were used by the Center to crush the rebellion. Mr. Siek replied that all he saw were rockets and automatic weapons. There were 300 soldiers. Mr. Koppe asked whether these were 300 soldiers from the center that were used to crush the rebellion, which Mr. Siek confirmed. “They came to uphold security in that sector.”

Mr. Koppe asked whether the witness was able to tell how many soldiers were killed or injured in these fights. Mr. Siek replied that there were no wounded soldiers. Some people were wounded by militiamen. Mr. Koppe inquired about the report Mr. Siek had sent to Oeun about the people detained at the island, as he had indicated in one of his statements. Mr. Siek replied that he sent the report to Oeun and Roeun from the Center about the rebellion. He did not remember exactly. He wrote that the situation was not good and that there had been a rebellion. Mr. Koppe asked whether there were any number indicated about how many people were Cham and how many people were Khmer. Mr. Siek replied that “it is impossible for me to make that distinction”, since he did not count the people involved. Mr. Koppe asked how Mr. Siek knew that the insurgents were both Khmer and Cham. Mr. Siek replied that he heard about this from soldiers.

Mr. Koppe referred to one of his Written Record of Interview where he had been asked whether he received an order by the Center to kill Cham people, which Mr. Siek had denied.[13] Mr. Koppe asked whether he still stood by his statement. Mr. Siek replied that the upper echelon did not give any instruction that the Khmer and Cham insurgents be purged. The instructions were that the KGB and CIA agents be eliminated. This prompted Mr. Koppe to read out an excerpt, where it had been stated that all insurgents, including Khmer and Cham people, had to be killed. This, according to the statement, did not target Cham specifically. Mr. Siek confirmed that this statement was correct. Even his younger relatives were smashed.

In another statement, Mr. Siek had stated that the Muslim Cham were not considered the enemy, but that they were not allowed to practice religion, as any other religion was prohibited as well.[14] Mr. Siek stood by his statement.

Mr. Koppe asked about the person called Chim, who was chief of the rubber plantation in Sector 42. Mr. Koppe asked whether this person was possibly the same person as they knew as Pech Chim. Mr. Siek replied that he did not know Chim’s last name. He became the chief of Chub rubber plantation.

 

The Role of Nuon Chea

Mr. Koppe turned to his last subject. He asked whether Mr. Siek never saw Nuon Chea in person, which Mr. Siek confirmed. “I was never even close to him, nor did I see him in person.” He knew that Nuon Chea was president of the National Assembly. Senior cadres had told him that Nuon Chea was in charge of training the senior cadres. He did not know anything else about Nuon Chea’s tasks. Mr. Siek said that Nuon Chea was the second person after Pol Pot and in charge of politics. He did not know any details. He did not hear about specific instructions. At that time, they used pseudonyms. He never heard a concrete example of Nuon Chea’s orders.

In his interview, Mr. Siek had stated that orders to kill or arrests were made by office 870 and that decisions to purge or kill came from Nuon Chea.[15] Mr. Siek replied that he made this statement based on what he heard from senior cadres and not based on what he witnessed. Mr. Koppe asked whether it was very likely that Nuon Chea would talk about purges of particular people in front of hundreds or thousands of people. At this point, Senior Assistant Prosecutor Dale Lysak objected to the question, since the question called for speculation and not factual knowledge of the witness.

Mr. Koppe rephrased his question and asked whether he ever heard anyone speaking about purging particular cadres at the study sessions that he attended. Mr. Siek replied that he never attended a study session chaired by Nuon Chea. He only attended a study session by Son Sen. The subject of this study session was KGB and CIA agents. They did not talk about purges of particular cadres at these meetings. However, almost all cadres disappeared.

The floor was then granted to the Khieu Samphan Defense Team. International Defense Counsel Anta Guissé started her line of questioning by asking to specify how many sectors there were in the Sectors and the names. Mr. Siek replied that there were three Sectors, name 41, 42, and 43. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was correct that he only performed his duty in Sector 42, which he confirmed. He was in Preah Prasab district when working at the fishing lot. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was correct that his direct superior was Sou Soeun, which he confirmed. Ms. Guissé further inquired whether she was his wife’s cousin, which Mr. Siek affirmed.

Ms. Guissé then asked under which name people knew him in Chamkar Leu, and in particular Sou Soeun. Mr. Siek replied that he used his name Ho there. Ms. Guissé inquired whether he was sure that he did not use the name Ta Phos while being there. Mr. Siek replied that he did not.

Ms. Guissé asked whether he used the name Ho or the name Hor. Mr. Siek replied that he used Hor at Chamkar Leu, and Hem at Krouch Chhmar.

Ms. Guissé asked why he changed aliases when he went to Krouch Chhmar. Mr. Siek replied that it was the instruction from the upper level. He was told by Oeun that he should not use any number but that he should use a different alias. Ms. Guissé explained that a certain number of witnesses had talked about the presence of a district chief called Hor at Krouch Chhmar.

Sou Soeun remembered him under the name of Ta Phos.[16] She inquired whether Sou Soeun did really not know him under the name of Ta Phos. Mr. Siek replied that the name was used when he fled into the jungle in 1979. Ms. Guissé asked whether that Sou Soeun knew him under this alias. Mr. Siek replied Sou Soeun called him Phos, which is what her husband also called him.

Ms. Guissé then asked whether he ever cooperated with people from Sector 41, either when working at the fishing unit, when working in Chamkar Leu or when working in Krouch Chhmar. Mr. Siek denied this. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was true that he had no way of knowing what happened in Sector 41 and that he attended no meetings related to Sector 41. Mr. Siek confirmed this.

Ms. Guissé then asked whether he could tell the court who was a member of the Central Zone standing committee, and who attended meetings of this Standing Committee. He replied that there were members of the sector level. He did not attend such meetings but knew members, such as An. The latter was in charge of Sector 41. The Sector Secretary of Sector 42 was Poch, who was also in charge of Baray District. He did not know who was in charge of Preah Prasab. He was in charge of the deputy commanders on the battlefields.

Ms. Guissé then inquired about Poch, who Mr. Siek had stated should have known about the security center. Mr. Siek confirmed that this person was the secretary of Baray District. He learned of his position “while I was in the jungle with him.” Ms. Guissé asked whether this meant that he never met him during the Democratic Kampuchea period. Mr. Siek replied that he met him to the end of the regime in the jungle. When Ms. Guissé asked whether Poch had ever mentioned other cadres who attended meetings with him, International Deputy Co-Prosecutor Dale Lysak interjected and asked for clarification of the name.

Mr. Siek confirmed that there were cadres who attended a meeting and talked about Poch. Those persons fled into the jungle later.

At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.

 

Purges

After the break, the floor was given to the Khieu Samphan Defense Team. Ms. Guissé resumed her line of questioning by turning back to the person Poch, who was head of Baray District, and asking whether Ouen, the brother of Sou Soeun and chief of region 42, held meetings attended by Poch, head of Baray District. At each meeting at the level of the sector, the head of the districts were present. Ms. Guissé asked whether Mr. Siek ever attended meetings chaired by Oeun, which Mr. Siek confirmed. However, he never attended the meetings with Poch. Meetings of the standing committee of the district were only attended by district chiefs.

Ms. Guissé requested leave to present a statement of witness 2-TCW-850, E3/5293, which was granted. Ms. Guissé asked whether he had seen the name of the person that was highlighted on the document, which Mr. Siek confirmed. He said that this person was indeed the district secretary.

Ms. Guissé read out an excerpt, which indicated that at a meeting chaired by Oeun, a plan was presented regarding the growing of rice, but no plan regarding purges.[17] She then asked whether he heard of a meeting chaired by Oeun during which a plan to grow rice was presented and during which mention was made of a documents that instructed not to make any distinction between 17^th April and Base People should be made when he was in Chamkar Leu. Mr. Siek confirmed this. This document had already been drafted when he went to Krouch Chhmar. That document essentially requested them to carry out executions to increase rice productions and to increase food rations. This document was issued after he returned from Krouch Chhmar. Ms. Guissé asked to clarify whether he really said that it required them to carry out executions. Ms. Siek said that this document had not invited them to carry out executions, but instructed them to refrain from further executions instead. He did not see the document with his own eyes, but Oeun referred to it during a meeting that was attended by teachers. He did not read the document.  This witness had stated that he saw the questionnaire, drafted in the form of a book.[18] Ms. Guissé asked whether Oeun told Mr. Siek what the provenance was of this circular. Mr. Siek said that, according to what Oeun told him, this document was from the upper echelon, perhaps from the Office 870. However, he could not recall who issued the document.

 

Marriages

Ms. Guissé then asked whether Mr. Siek was also in charge of marriages as part of his duties in Chamkar Leu, which he denied. However, he did attend wedding ceremonies. Mr. Siek replied that marriages involved several couples. The respective units made the proposals. Ms. Guissé said that the same witness had stated that marriages were decided during the meetings between the districts and the communes. They were, according to this witness, according to the criteria of a minimum age of 18 years, love, and the authorization of parents.[19] . Ms. Guissé asked whether he recalled attending any meetings during which these criteria were discussed. Mr. Siek replied that he could not remember what was said during the meetings.

Ms. Guissé then turned to clarify some terms that he had used. He had talked about arrests that were carried out in Krouch Chhmar and that information was sent to ma choeun, which was translated to ‘the Center’.[20]  She asked what the Center stood for. Mr. Siek replied that the Center was the highest echelon. Ms. Guissé asked what the Center corresponded to during the Democratic Kampuchea, or whether this was just a generic term that was used at the time. Mr. Siek said that Pol Pot, Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary were part of the Center. Ms. Guissé asked whether he ever met any of the three persons he had mentioned during Democratic Kampuchea, which Mr. Siek denied. Ms. Guissé asked whether he knew how decisions were taken at the Center. Mr. Siek replied that he had “forgotten everything.” Ms. Guissé asked whether he knew what the figure Office 870 meant, since he referred to it in his statement. Mr. Siek replied that Office 870 was part of the Center or the Center itself. Asked who exactly represented the office, Mr. Siek replied that he did not know who the members were. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was correct to say that his immediate superior – when he was at the level of the district at Chamkar Leu – was the district secretary. He replied that his immediate superior was Soeun, district secretary. Ms. Guissé asked whether apart from the conversation he had with Sou Soeun, he had not any other discussions with Son Sen. Mr. Siek replied that he did not have any discussions with Son Sen. He was sent to Krouch Chhmar by Son Sen and Roeun.

Mr. Siek confirmed that he had to write a comprehensive biography two times. The second time was after his brother was killed. It was well-known that his brother had been killed, but Mr. Siek did not mention his brother’s execution in his biography. They told him that his brother had been killed, but that he would not have to be afraid and should go back to work with Ke Pauk. Ms. Guissé asked whether this was the only time that he spoke to Son Sen. Mr. Siek said that he spoke to Son Sen twice. This took place once at a meeting and the second time when he wrote his biography. “I just broke down in fear” when Son Sen told him that his “little brother had been eliminated”.

 

In Krouch Chhmar

Ms. Guissé turned to the moment when he was assigned to Krouch Chhmar. She asked whether it was true that this assignment was conducted by Oeun, which Mr. Siek confirmed. Mr. Siek further confirmed that Oeun advised him to change his alias. Ms. Guissé asked again which alias Mr. Siek used when he arrived in the East Zone. He replied that he was initially known as Hor, but that this changed to Heng when he went to Krouch Chhmar. Ms. Guissé asked whether he presented himself under the latter name to the people who were under his orders. Mr. Siek confirmed this. “Then he told me, Comrade Heng, you are in charge of Krouch Chhmar district, […] so I went.” There were some other people with him. Ms. Guissé asked which other people were assigned at the same time as him. Mr. Siek replied that there were Ao and Oeun. They were assigned by the Central Zone with each of them having a messenger.

Ms. Guissé asked whether he ever heard about an “arrest wave” of Cham people in Trea and whether he ordered to detain Cham people in Trea. Mr. Siek replied that “after the rebellion, I went for the study session and after that I returned. I worked in the worksite to gather the people in the worksite and then to draft soldiers to go to the front battlefield”, since the situation was severe back then. He said he did not know about the event that Ms. Guissé talked about.

She then referred to It Sen’s testimony, in which he had confirmed a previous statement in which he had said that there was a certain Seng who was the military chief of a commune.[21] Ms. Guissé asked whether he remembered a person who was called Seng who was a person in a commune in Krouch Chhmar district. Mr. Siek denied this. “That name does not ring a bell.” Ms. Guissé then sought clarification regarding his arrival in Krouch Chhmar. She wanted to know what the name was of his deputy who was injured and under which circumstances he was shot. Mr. Siek replied that his name was Ao, who was the Deputy Secretary. He was shot at the river bank in the afternoon, but he could not recall the date. Ms. Guissé asked whether Mr. Siek was responsible for the military or the soldiers in his position as the district chief. Mr. Siek denied this and said that there were Central Zone soldiers who worked in collaboration with the army. After the rebellion, he was sent to a study session. After this study session, he had to implement the agricultural work plan on the work sites. They were talking about whether to flee to Thailand, since the situation was chaotic.

 

Recruitment of Soldiers

This prompted Ms. Guissé to ask whether she therefore correctly that he referred not only to the flight of Sao Phim when referring to “a chaotic situation”, but also to fights. Mr. Siek said that he was informed about the formation of the National Salvation Front and that he should not sleep at one place. Ms. Guissé asked whether she was correct that he had to recruit soldiers to fight at the Vietnamese border when working in Krouch Chhmar, which Mr. Siek confirmed. Ms. Guissé asked whether he did so and when he did so in 1978[22] He replied that he could not remember. He was instructed by the Center to recruit 100, but he recruited 200. The Center was alerted and he was called by the Center to answer questions.

Ms. Guissé referred to one of Mr. Siek’s statement, where he had indicated having recruited five to ten people per commune.[23] According to his statement, each commune sent them the soldiers that he trained and armed.  He had recruited 200 instead of the 100 people Center had requested. Ms. Guissé asked whether this was the same event, which Mr. Siek confirmed. “My plan was to recruit up to 200.” He recalled that the Center was concerned that he might start a rebellion. This was when he was asked about his biography. Ms. Guissé said that in the same section, he said that the soldiers were given to Roeun. Ms. Guissé asked whether the recruitment was linked to the fighting at the Vietnamese borders, or something else. Mr. Siek replied that there were two objectives: to train them for when the Vietnamese would arrive, and second to suppress those who had engaged in traitorous activities. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was true that he took the initiative to recruit more than those required by the upper echelon and that he assigned those 100 soldiers to protect the district, which Mr. Siek confirmed. Ms. Guissé asked whether there were other district chiefs did the same. Mr. Siek replied that he did not know. Ke Pich Vannak: Ms. Guissé asked when the fighting began at the Vietnamese border. Mr. Siek replied that “to my limited knowledge”, it started with the arrest of cadres. “Some cadres actually fled to Vietnam.” He knew this because he “was there” and was “providing training to the soldiers.” The situation “was rather disturbing” and they were concerned about the villagers who might rebel and the invading forces. Ms. Guissé asked whether he personally witnessed the desertion of soldiers who escaped to join forces in Vietnam, which Mr. Siek denied.

Ms. Guissé stated that he had said that among the 200 soldiers that he had trained, a hundred fled and fought against the Democratic Kampuchea forces. She asked whether he remembered saying this. He replied that “soldiers had to be recruited and trained in Krouch Chhmar district”. However, when he returned Son Sen told him that Mr. Siek would not be killed. “Those who didn’t have a boat to cross the river” swam across the river. The people in Krouch Chhmar district were evacuated to Chamkar Leu.

Ms. Guissé turned to the statement by Ke Pich Vannak, who had talked about investigations concerning bodies floating in the river.[24] Ms. Guissé asked whether he heard about “such an inquiry”, which Mr. Siek denied. Ms. Guissé asked what Ke Pauk’s exact position was when he saw the bodies floating in the river. Mr. Siek replied that he was chief of the central zone and had some authority over soldiers. Ms. Guissé asked whether Mr. Siek was sure not having heard of such an investigation when he was in Krouch Chhmar. Mr. Siek replied that he had not heard about this. Ms. Guissé asked whether he knew which side the soldiers belonged to, since he had testified that the bodies which were floating in the river were soldiers. Mr. Siek denied knowledge. Ms. Guissé then asked whether he ever spoke to Oeun or another leader about this incident. Mr. Siek replied that he said that he saw three or four corpses in the meeting after he saw it. He was told that “it was not a big deal”, since the main concern was about the “national situation”. The meeting included sector chiefs, such as Rin. He was told that he “should not bother about that.”

Ms. Guissé then referred back to his statement. In this statement, he had indicated that “a problem occurred” when he arrived in Krouch Chhmar.[25] The hundred soldiers that he had recruited fled to the jungle to fight against them. Ms. Guissé asked whether he became aware of the fact that a hundred soldiers had fled and rebelled. Mr. Siek replied that he had been told that the soldiers that he had trained had fled to the forest together with the weapons. For this reason, people had to be evacuated to Steung Trong and then Chamkar Leu.

 

 

The role of Hor in the district

At the beginning of the last session, the floor was given back to the Khieu Samphan Defense Team. Ms. Guissé continued her line of questioning by asking whether Mr. Siek was the military chief of Sector 42, which Mr. Siek denied.

Ke Pich Vannak had stated that Mr. Siek had been the military chief of Sector 42, before being sent to Krouch Chhmar.[26] Mr. denied this function. He had resumed his duty as chief of public works, before becoming chief of the district. Mr. Siek replied that “this was to the west of the public garage” work department. Ms. Guissé asked whether his duty to enlist soldiers was related to any military training he had previously received. Mr. Siek said that he was “not a trainer.” The recruitment was done in collaboration with the commune chief. He denied that he had trained soldier. “I was not a trainer, I was not an instructor.” All he did, according to Mr. Siek, was to issue instructions to fight against the dissidents. He provided information so that “everyone knew exactly what the situation was.”

Ms. Guissé asked him to react to statements given to the court. She started with the testimony of No Satas, who had talked about her arrest and detention in house in Trea, where she had been interrogated by a district head named Hor.[27] This person was, according to her recollection, the new district chief who came from the other bank of the river. The Member was called Chim. office was not far from the river; soldiers told her that he was district chief. Ms. Guissé asked whether he remembered a house on stilts next to the river where women were detained. Mr. Siek denied knowledge about this matter. “I spent most of my time at the worksite. There was no fixed district office.” The worksite was close to a military barrack.

The witness further described interaction with Hor, the district chief, who asked her what her ethnic origin was.[28] She asked whether Mr. Siek participated in a selection of people of Cham origin, which Mr. Siek denied. “I did not involve in any such selection. When I was in Krouch Chhmar, there were other cadres and district soldiers who worked there. I myself do not know this madam Satas in Krouch Chhmar at all.”

Later, she had described how a pork-based soup had been prepared to test whether they were Cham people in the presence of Hor and soldiers.[29] Ms. Guissé asked whether he ordered people to prepare pork soup and watched to see whether the people were Cham or Khmer. Mr. Siek replied that he did not issue such an instruction.

Ms. Guissé turned to the next witness (2-TCW-904) who also talked about Hor in Krouch Chhmar.[30] This witness had stated that the security office had been built under instructions of Hor, who was in charge of the arrest of several Cham.  Ms. Guissé asked whether he was responsible for the arrest of several Cham and whether he summoned villagers in a pagoda to explain their tasks to them. Mr. Siek replied that someone said that he was a sector soldier. “I did not involve in such an activity at all.” By that time “I spent most of my time at the worksite.”

Ms. Guissé then referred to a Cham woman (2-TCW-928,) who said that Hor, the head of Krouch Chhmar district, was in charge of executions.[31]  According to this testimony, Hor stayed seven months at the worksite. At a later part in the statement, she had said that Hor had said that he would kill 70 married couples. Ms. Guissé asked whether he participated in the marriage of Cham and other people in Krouch Chhmar and whether he said that he was going to execute all of these couples. Mr. Siek denied participation in the wedding ceremony and in the plan to kill any Cham people.

 

Genocide of the Cham

Ms. Guissé then referred to the last witness (2-TCW-893), who had talked about a meeting in Kampong Thom province.[32] This witness had stated that Ke Pauk instructed the Krouch Chhmar District secretary to first kill all the Cham, because “they are traitors.” Ms. Guissé asked whether he attend such a meeting and received these instructions, which Mr. Siek denied. “I was the one who rode the motorbike” when he went to attend meetings. Ms. Guissé asked whether there was another person by the name of Hor who was in Krouch Chhmar district. Mr. Siek replied that he did not know. “When I attended the study session at the upper level, I did not receive any instructions to purge the Cham, not at all. (…) Ke Pauk never set a plan to purge the Cham people.” To his knowledge, those people who were involved in the rebellion were purged. He denied that Cham people were forced to eat pork. “When I was at the worksite, we actually killed a cow for people to eat, and this had nothing to do with pork.” At this point, Ms. Guissé finished her line of questioning and gave the floor to her national colleague Kong Sam Onn.

National Khieu Samphan counsel Kong Sam Onn started his line of questioning by asking where Trapeang Chuk was located, which Mr. Siek had mentioned in relation to Cham people. Mr. Siek replied that it was in Trapeang Thom. “If there was a plan from the Center to purge all the Cham people, then they would have all been killed.” Mr. Sam Onn asked whether Mr. Siek had any authority in Trapeang Chuk, which he denied. However, he knew some Cham people there. “As I said, there was no plan to purge Cham people.” The enemies were not the Cham but the Vietnamese people, according to Mr. Siek.

Mr. Sam Onn referred to yesterday’s testimony, where he had testified about going to be district secretary.[33] Mr. Sam Onn inquired what it meant that the rest of the communes were autonomous. Mr. Siek replied that this was not in Krouch Chhmar but in Chamkar Leu where he was in charge of two districts. When Mr. Sam Onn repeated his question, Mr. Siek replied that these communes administered their own matters.

Next, Mr. Sam Onn inquired what he meant with the organization of the communes and whether he meant that the cadres administered these communes. Mr. Siek said that new commune chiefs were appointed.

Before the “event of the CIA purge”, they ate rice mixed with corn. Sometimes they had to eat gruel in these cooperatives. They used corn to supplement the rice. He did not know where the rice yields had been sent to.

Turning to the topic of his deputy being shot, Mr. Siek told the court that this took place around 1.5 months after he arrived in Chamkar Leu. His deputy was shot in the left chest. It took place around three months before the fall of the regime.

Mr. Sam Onn then asked whether the conflicts happened only in a specific location or throughout his hall commune. Mr. Siek replied that the “so-called separatists” fled to the jungle, including the soldiers he had trained. Three days later, they emerged from the jungle into Chamkar Leu. Later he saw Son Sen at Bok Knao.

Mr. Sam Onn asked who was in charge of managing the people at the time: were they under his supervision or the so-called separatist group? Mr. Siek replied that the people seemed not to be satisfied with the Democratic Kampuchea leadership. They did not have any artillery to bomb or shell the people who fled to the jungle. Mr. Sam Onn asked whether it was correct that the separatists controlled the area, which Mr. Siek denied. “We had the forces on the ground and the battlefield”, while the separatists were at the district demarcation line. With this, Kong Sam Onn concluded his questioning.

The President thanked the witness and dismissed him. He then announced that 2-TCW-904 would be heard next.

 

New Witness

The witness Suf Rumly was born in 1955 in Trea Village in Krouch Chhmar district, Kampong Cham province, where he is also currently residing and is a rice farmer. The witness was then sworn in by repeating the oath with one hand on the Qu’ran (see post of September 7 for the oath). The President then informed the witness about his rights and obligations. Mr. Rumly had been interviewed three times. When the floor was given to the Office of the Co-Investigating Judges, Mr. Koppe interjected. He noted that there was a conflict of interest with the counsel, since he was assisted with the same counsel as the witness before. The previous witness had been confronted with statements made by Mr. Rumly. Mr. Koppe therefore said that this witness should not be assisted by the same duty counsel.

After the bench had conferred, the President thanked Mr. Koppe for his opinion and stated that the Chamber was “not sure” whether it could rule on this matter. They had not been informed earlier. He adjourned the hearing. The hearings would resume tomorrow, 9 am.

 

 

 

[1] E3/952, at 00182658 (EN), 0000766 (KH), 00350762-3 (FR).

[2] E3/375, at 00360757 (EN), 00369919 (FR),  00348797-98 (KH).

[3] E3/35, at 00346148 (EN), 00340562 (KH), 00367720 (FR).

[4] 22 June 2015, testimony of combatant 310: Sen Hoeun , E1/319, at 15:34.

[5] E3/375, at 00360757 (EN), 00369919 (FR), 00348798 (KH).

[6]E3/35 son of Ke Pauk 00346153 (EN), 00340567 (KH), 00367725 (FR).

[7] E3/1568

[8] E3/1568; confirmed in  E3/4994.

[9] E319/28.3.1, at question and answer 3.

[10]E3/35, at 00340571 (KH), 00346156 (EN), 00367728 (FR).

[11]E3/375, at 00348798 (KH), 00360757 (EN) 00369919 (FR)

[12] E319/28.3.1, answer 8

[13] E319/19.3.86, at question and answer 53.

[14]E3/375, at 00360759 (EN), 00348800 (KH), 00369922 (FR).

[15]E319/19.3.86 , at question and answer 64.

[16] Transcript of June 4, 2015, shortly before 09:52.

[17] E3/5293, at 00367749 (FR) 00348842 (KH), 00351703 (EN).

[18] Ibid.

[19] E3/5293 00367751 (FR), 00348844 (KH); 00351705 (EN).

[20] E319/19.3.73, at 00841972 (FR), 00800956 (KH), 00841967 (EN).

[21] 8^th September 2015: E1/343.1.

[22] The English version translated this as 1977. The French is the original.

[23]E3/375, at 00369916 (FR), 00360754 (EN), 00348793-94 (KH)

[24]E3/35

[25]E3/375, 00369920 (FR), 00348798 (KH), 00360758 (EN).

[26]E3/35, at 00367724 (FR), 00340566 (KH), 00346152 (EN).

[27] Testimony of No Satas, Transcript September 28 2015, shortly after 15:04.

[28] Testimony of No Satas, Transcript September 28 2015, at 15:09.

[29] Testimony of No Satas, Transcript September 28 2015, at 15:23.

[30]E3/5196, at 00274740 (FR), 00223088 (EN), 00204457 (KH).

[31]E3/5194, at 00268839 (FR), 00274708 (EN) 00204407 (KH).

[32]E3/2653, at 00219179 (EN), 00904397 (KH), only one page translated into French: E3/9323.

[33] At 10.46.11.

 

Featured Image: Witness Ban Siek (ECCC: Flickr)