Civil Party Testifies About Instructions to Consummate Marriage to Produce Children
Expert Stephen Morris concluded his testimony today. He was questioned on a range of issues, including the perception of the Cambodian situation in Vietnam and vice versa, armed conflict, paranoia and the treatment of Vietnamese in Democratic Kampuchea.
In the afternoon, Civil Party Preap Sokhouem told the Chamber about her experiences of being forced to marry and consummate her marriage, as well as her struggle to feed herself and her child.
Conflict with Vietnam
International Co-Prosecutor Nicholas Koumjian asked how China reacted to the December 25 invasion in Cambodia. The expert replied that it sent troops to the border and started “its own little war” with Vietnam. This took place in the northern region of Vietnam in order to prevent all Vietnamese troops to go to Cambodia.
Chinese action was comparable to the first incursion in Cambodia, but less powerful than the second and third. Den Xiaoping used the rhetoric of “teaching Vietnam a lesson”.[1][2]
The Vietnamese regarded Ieng Sary and Pol Pot closer than they actually were, since they were married to their sisters. They did not know them, since they were not trained in Hanoi. “Ieng Sary was not the second most powerful person […] and Nuon Chea is most likely more deserving of the [position of the] second most powerful.” He insisted that Ieng Sary was not as powerful as Nuon Chea.
Mr. Koumjian put a hypothesis to the expert. He said that the Vietnamese might have had hopes that some of the Khmer Rouge party could break up and seek accommodation or defect to Vietnamese side, and believed that Nuon Chea had pro-Vietnam orientation. It was therefore necessary separate him from Pol Pot. Mr. Morris replied that it seemed like a reasonable hypothesis. What they thought of Nuon Chea in 1979, he could not comment upon.
The communist party “did not do exceptionally well in 1955.” Mr. Koppe then asked whether the members of the communist party eventually joined the movement, which the expert confirmed.[3] Mr. Koumjian read a New York Times article from 23 December 1977 and another newspaper of 29 August 1977, which related to the Cambodian-Thai relationship. [4] “I regard the DK leadership as fundamentally irrational.” Engaging into armed conflict “indicated the disconnect from reality” of the leadership, he said.
Mr. Koumjian then read out a telegram of 19 January 1978 by Brother Choeun (Sao Phim) to Brother Pol and copying other high-ranking cadres. This telegram reported on attacks on Vietnam, including civilians.[5] He then read another telegram, which related to other attacks.[6] Mr. Morris confirmed that this showed that Cambodia attacked Vietnam even after the Vietnamese withdrew in early 1978.
Mr. Koumjian then asked whether he would criticize more people than Kiernan, who he had criticized yesterday, for having changed their opinion on Democratic Kampuchea very late. He pointed to Gareth Porter and George Hildebrandt, authors of Cambodian Starvation or Revolution, who had been, in Mr. Morris’ view, too favorable of Democratic Kampuchea. He said that Porter denied atrocities in 1977. Richard Dudman, the expert alleged, was also slow to recognize what had gone wrong. As for Sydney Schanberg, he said he “was late to understand what the Khmer Rouge was all about, but he did report with reasonable accuracy what happened with the evacuation of Phnom Penh and shortly thereafter.”
Treatment of Vietnamese in Democratic Kampuchea
Mr. Koumjian referred to a document and Meas Voeun’s testimony that both related to the treatment of the Vietnamese in Democratic Kampuchea.[7] At this point, both Nuon Chea Defense Counsel Victor Koppe and Khieu Samphan Defense Counsel Anta Guissé objected. Mr. Koppe said that Mr. Koumjian was leading, while Ms. Guissé said that the witness changed his testimony at the time. Mr. Morris did not know whether the Vietnamese leadership knew about attacks on Vietnamese civilians. He did not remember press reports regarding attacks on the Vietnamese population.
Mr. Koumjian quoted the expert’s book and a Revolutionary Flag which related to one Cambodian fighting thirty Vietnamese.[8] This showed a “detachment from reality” and was completely unrealistic.[9] In France, Cambodian communist students were sympathetic to Vietnam at the time and “therefore wished to avoid the derogatory term yuon.”[10] Sihanouk, as quoted by Mr. Koumjian, had said that Vietnam had to be treated very carefully and not provoked to conflict. However, Democratic Kampuchea took a different approach in that “normal processes of prudence” were not applicable, since Cambodian communism was seen as superior. He said that this contributed to the Vietnamese invasion and occupation of the country. The Vietnamese “always wanted to have control” in Cambodia, but Pol Pot’s policies gave them an apparent license to intervene and eliminate Cambodia’s independence.
Paranoia
With this, Mr. Koumjian concluded his line of questioning and the floor was handed to the Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers.
International Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Marie Guiraud said that she would ask questions about paranoia and what he called hyper-Maoism.
Ms. Guiraud asked whether she understood it correctly that the CPK was not an exception and that it had paranoid tendencies in the Democratic Kampuchea political culture, which Mr. Morris confirmed. Ms. Guiraud said he had compared Pol Pot to Stalin and Hitler.[11] She asked him to explain the dichotomy between paranoia and personality cults.
He replied that they created personality cults, as could be seen with Stalin, but at the same time having a deep sense of paranoia. The conspiratorial fear was inherent in the revolutionary setting, he said, and carried out by a dictator. Ms. Guiraud said that he had said that there were no accidents in history and that there was a concept of conspiracy[12]
He said that the concept of the “enemy” was very central to these movements. Ms. Guiraud quoted his book, in which he had said that a system was constructed through which enemies were perceived as agents of foreign hostile powers. Mr. Morris replied that as Stalin had created a construct in which his rivals were seen as agents of foreign powers, Pol Pot created a narrative in which the enemies from within were KTB or CIA agents.
Role of Angkar
Ms. Guiraud asked whether his research allowed him to think about the role of Angkar in relation to Pol Pot. He said that Democratic Kampuchea was a conspiratorial organization affected by the paranoid atmosphere and that leaders were even more paranoid, but that the party in general was influenced by paranoia, “because of the nature of the party as a conspiratorial organization”.
The nature of the paranoid pseudo-community of KTB and CIA agents cooperating was “unbelievable”. Ms. Guiraud quoted Nuon Chea, who had addressed the public in court on 31 October 2013, and who had said that the East Zone was responsible.[13] Mr. Morris said that he saw some examples of that in his speech. He put blame on the elements who aligned themselves with the Vietnamese later. He said there was a central policy of the de-population of cities, abolition of money, lack of medicine, and hard labor – and that this was not peculiar to the East Zone.
At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.
Ms. Guiraud asked whether the incapacity to question oneself was intrinsic in the revolutionary movement that put the blame always on enemies instead of questioning own actions. Mr. Morris confirmed this. He said that the Americans were never able to penetrate the Vietnamese Communist Party and that they were incapable of penetrating revolutionary states, including Cambodia. “There was very little capacity of the top leaders to question themselves.” Ms. Guiraud said that Le Duan had said that the Vietnamese communist party had tried to contact Sao Phim, which took place around three months after he had been arrested.[14] Mr. Morris said that it showed a lack of competence and did not know what was going on in Cambodia.
Ms. Guiraud quoted defense strategies that had been submitted to the court.[15] She asked how he would assess the ability to question themselves 40 years after the regime.
Mr. Koppe interjected and objected. “It is the first time ever that in this court room that the defense position is put before a witness or an expert.” The conclusions were based on a wealth of evidence, he said, suggesting coup d’états against the government that it “would be only fair” to confront the expert with these underlying sources. Ms. Guiraud withdrew her question. “I think the objection is perhaps as interesting.”
Ms. Guiraud asked him to explain the link between the feeling of inferiority that he had pointed out and the need to always go further.[16] Mr. Morris replied that this was what he referred to with hyper-Maoism: to go forward more extremely. “They believed that they had to prove themselves as authentic and great communists by doing what Mao had done, but much quicker.” Most small countries, he said, felt a sense of inferiority towards bigger countries.
Ms. Guiraud asked whether he saw a link between the speed in which the revolution was carried out and the alleged crimes that the Chamber had to consider. Mr. Morris said that there was a relationship. The elimination of difference “goes down a long way to explain” what happened.
With this, Ms. Guiraud concluded her line of questioning and the floor was handed to the Defense Team for Khieu Samphan.
Soviet Union
Khieu Samphan Defense Counsel Anta Guissé wanted to know whether it was correct that the most important sources for writing his book were the Soviet archive, which he confirmed. She then wanted to know whether he had found any evidence regarding discussions between Soviet Union officials and Democratic Kampuchea officials or Vietnam. He replied that he only found conversations between Vietnam and the Soviet Union, and not between Cambodia and the Soviet Union. He was used these documents to establish what the Vietnamese perceived as what the situation was.
The Soviets only had information from the Vietnamese side to know what was happening in Cambodia. However, he had analyzed documents that were captured by the United States regarding the war time in Cambodia.
Ms. Guissé asked him to react to Chandler’s critique of his book.[17] Mr. Morris said he “wanted to apologize to not have read documents that surfaced after my book was completed.” He said he would like to read those documents to see whether they reflected reality.
Ms. Guissé then wanted to know whether what he described as paranoia was not rather intrinsic in the period having been chaotic. He replied that not everyone reacted in a paranoid way. He had come to the conclusion that they were acting paranoid in light of their belief that the CIA and KTB collaborated.
She said that his assistant referred to a conversation between Soviet officials, which seemed to indicate that Nuon Chea was not the most senior person in Democratic Kampuchea and that talked about the relationship between the Soviet Union and Cambodia. She asked whether this refreshed his memory.[18] He replied that he was not aware of this document. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was not inherent in the Cold War period to hide information based on some kind of agenda that they had.
Ms. Guissé asked whether he had studied the relationship between border conflicts and the colonial period. He replied that he had not focused on this. They were a reflection, in his mind, of a more profound causes and to be understood as symptoms and not causes.
Ms. Guissé then quoted a document of 20 August 1975 by the Australian ambassador and asked whether his concern was taken up by other ambassadors as well.[19] He answered that he did not find information about the Indochinese federation from other countries.
Ms. Guissé quoted a conversation between Le Duan and the Soviet ambassador, who had discussed an issue of nine battalions.[20] He said that he did not have more information about this. Ms. Guissé said that he had said that a Friendship Treaty took place between Hanoi and Moscow in 1978.
Ms. Guissé asked what the possible political alliances were at the time. He replied that he did not go into the diplomatic offenses, but that the Vietnamese regarded the best way to exercise influence in Cambodia by allying with the Soviet Union.
At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.
Diplomatic offenses
After the break, Ms. Guissé wanted to follow up on the Vietnamese diplomatic offenses. Diplomatically it was important for Vietnam to have the non-aligned movement on its side. The relations between Germany and Eastern Vietnam were very close. Ms. Guissé said that they had a report on record that regarded the relation between Vietnam and Cambodia. This extract was from the GDR of January 1, 1978.[21] He said he was not aware of the document, but that the Republic of North Korea was aligned with Vietnam. Ms. Guissé asked whether it was easier for Vietnam to approach non-aligned countries than Cambodia, which Mr. Morris confirmed. He explained that Vietnam had a longer history of diplomatic relations. Democratic Kampuchea only established diplomatic relations with only around eight countries. He said he had forgotten the conditions of establishing negotiations at the time.
Ms. Guissé then asked about his reference to Vietnam’s willingness to negotiate. He said that Vietnam was willing to negotiate in 1977, but changed its mind in 1978. Ms. Guissé then referred to Douglas Pike’s stance before congress.[22]
She quoted Nayan Chanda, who had said that Vietnam offered to solve the Cambodian problem by the withdrawal of troops, the recognition that Cambodians “chased out” the Vietnamese and then international monitoring of borders. Chanda said that Vietnam’s position was unacceptable for the Cambodians, but at least the responsibility would not lie with Vietnam.[23] Mr. Morris said that it was not clear to him whether Vietnam decided in early 1978 to invade Cambodia.
Ms. Guissé then referred to the notion of paranoia. Ms. Guissé wanted to know whether he used it exclusively for these regimes, or whether it was not valid for “both camps”. He denied the latter and said that there were real concerns about some behavior of the Soviet Union, but he did not think that this was paranoia. “There were no S-21s in the United States, or Britain, or France.” The Vietnamese “misperceived Democratic Kampuchea and Democratic Kampuchea misperceived Vietnam to some extent.” There was paranoia in many parts of the world, but not at the same scale as to the ones in revolutionary states. He stressed that it was not exclusive to revolutionary states, but inherent.
Ms. Guissé asked whether it was not always difficult to recognize the mistakes if their choices had led to disaster, even if that was not intentional. Mr. Morris confirmed this. “It is often difficult for governments to recognize that their choices had led to disaster.”
With this, Ms. Guissé concluded her questioning and the testimony of Mr. Stephen Morris came to an end. The President thanked the expert and dismissed him. He then ordered to usher in the Civil Party.
New Civil Party: Preap Sokhoeum
Preap Sokhoeum was born on 12 October 1951 on her ID, but she said her real year of birth was the year of the monkey.[24] She was born in Prey Chhor District, Kampong Cham Province. She had two daughters. She could not recall the exact day of her wedding.
The floor was granted to the Civil Party lawyers. Lor Chunthy started putting questions to the Civil Party why the date of birth was wrong on her ID. She replied that she had told the official that she was born in the year of the monkey, but that she could not remember month or day. She said she was 62 years old now. Before 1975, she was assigned to work in an art performance group. Later, she had to carry rice. In 1975, they were gathered and sent to live in units in cotton plantations. The union in 1975 was in Anlong Dalang in Kampong Cham Province. They were given two cans of rice at the time and assigned to clear forest. One day she was sent to clear the forest, and in the late afternoon a messenger called her. Comrade Ly asked her whether she respected Angkar’s orders. She told him: “If Angkar instructed me to go into a crap hole, I would do that.”
Marriage
The next day, she went back to the plantation and a messenger called her a little bit before noon time. She went to her sleeping quarter where Comrade Ly came to her and asked her why she had not picked up clothes to attend the event. She was given pants, clothes, and a scarf. On the day that she was called, she was the only one of her unit. At the venue she saw women who were weeping. “As I said, after the marriage I did not find happiness at all, there was only sadness.” The women were instructed to sit in one row and men in another. Representatives of units were there. They announced names and they had to stand up to be husband and wives. At the time, she was known as Phoa and her husband was called Keo. She did not know her husband before. “At the time we were weeping. We wanted to have the presents of our parents.” When the names were called, they would stand up and go to sit at a table. None of her relatives attended the wedding. The only people who were there were the representatives of the units and the soon-to-be wed couples.
Consummation of Marriage
After the wedding, they had to sleep in one long building. “After we got married, we were under surveillance from the window and we were told to stay together and consummate our marriage.” They saw them when leaving the building and they would ask where they had gone if they stayed out of the building for long. They were allowed to stay together for three days and were then allowed to see each other once a month. “I did not have any feeling to have sexual intercourse with the man whom I did not love.” She would sit up when he was sleeping, and when he sat up, she would sleep on the floor. One night, she was sleeping on the floor. He put a hand on her body and she told him that she was committed not to allow anyone to touch her body. The marriage had not been held under the customs of her country, she said, and she therefore did not allow him to touch her. “I never had any sexual intercourse with my husband, because I could evade from one location to another.” Her husband was sometimes asked by his colleagues why he had scars on his hand. One day, there was an oxcart coming to collect her at 10 pm, but she protested that she would not go alone. During the time, people would disappear when taking her away. They allowed her to be accompany Sophea with her. The next day, she was told to go to the house that was responsible for making palm tree. She met Ta Horm and another cadre there and they told her that she had to consummate her marriage, since she would otherwise be killed. “In the evening they asked my husband to ride me to another location.” She told the elder woman to stay with her and not go away. A little bit later, her husband climbed up the house. Her husband was trying to convince her, but she did not allow him to touch her body. Sometimes, she would jump out of the house and she saw that there was a person out of the house.
One day, she fetched watered and a youth saw her. He offered her to help her carry the water and she then went back to her house. Her husband convinced her to sleep. She slept tightly, but at night time “I saw his hands on my body, and on that day, he tore my clothes, my shirt, my trousers, and took of my bra, and then he raped me. I shouted […] and he asked me not to shout.” They separated from one another after that day.
She was in the union and her union was dismantled. Her husband asked for permission to live with him. She went to live with. One month later, she became sick. “Perhaps I had the morning sickness, but I did not know about that.” She was sent to the commune hospital. After staying in the hospital for a few days, she became better. When she went to the hospital again, she was diagnosed to be pregnant. She was discharged of the hospital after having stayed there for half a month. Her mother told her not to return to Thnal Keng. Her mother was told to ask for permission so that she could stay with her. She did not live with her husband at the time. At this point, the President adjourned the hearing for a break.
Emotional Impact
After the break, she said that they could not divorce during the Khmer Rouge if they disliked each other. She was told that if she disobeyed, she would be sent to sleep at her district. She told everyone that she slept with her husband every day. After she got married, she was scared. “I could not eat well, and I had to endure hard labor. […] The only thing that I could think of was that I would die one day.” She pretended that they got along well. One day, when her husband came to visit her someone asked her why she did not come to receive him: she had forgotten his face already. Her unit chief knew who her husband was. Those who were married at the union were allowed to stay together for three days. Her husband came to visit her. They did not have blankets, pillows, or mosquito nets. Her husband went to his place and had to see Comrade Sor first, who would rely that information to him.
She was forced to have sex with him. She was sleepy, because she did not dare to sleep before. When she woke up, he hugged her and took off her clothes. “He tore away my underpants and ripped my shirt.” He told her that if she shouted Angkar would kill them both. She cried and told him that her father would not allow a man to do that to her. “I kept weeping throughout the whole night.” She did not know whether Angkar instructed him to do so. The only thing that she knew was that he did it also for his own purpose. “I hurt physically and morally, because it was the pain that he inflicted upon my physically, and morally I was hurt by his act.” She regretted that she betrayed her father’s words. “I could not sleep and I could not eat, and I became pale”, she said. Her husband came from Thnal Kei. He was separated to raise ducks elsewhere. He was then sent elsewhere again. They said that handicapped people were useless. He was handicapped and she worried that he would not live until the child was born.
He wanted to flee to the forest, but she told him that she would be killed as well. She told him that he would have to kill her first. Her husband returned to his workstation and disappeared since then. Comrade Kor told her father that he would tell her husband that she was about to deliver the baby. “My feeling was so unsettling, but I told myself that I would not die, because that would mean that my baby would die.”
She became sick for five days. Throughout the pregnancy and delivery she was “so mistreated by these people and the cooperative.” There was no professional midwife at the time. A neighbor had some experience in delivery of babies and helped her. Her husband made her some drink. “There was no proper midwife. Everything was done according to nature.” They were installed with “constant fear”. She still felt it nowadays. There was another set of marriage a few months after her marriage. During her ceremony, there were 15 couples.
Mr. Chunthy concluded his line of questioning and gave the floor to National Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyer Pich Ang. Mr. Ang asked her whether she was scared to get married and if so, why. She was scared of being killed if she disobeyed. “So I went to the location in tears.” She was threatened to be killed or to be “brought to an office”, which she said meant being imprisoned. Thus, she had to force herself to live with her husband. The women who disagreed to go with men disappeared from the unit. Comrade Proeung disappeared.
When Mr. Ang asked her whether her husband raped her again, Mr. Sam Onn interjected and said that she did not know whether the rape was Angkar’s instruction. Mr. Ang asked whether her husband provided any explanation when he raped her. She replied that when he raped her he said that if she did not allow him to “do that” he could not fulfill Angkar’s instructions and that they would all die.
Mr. Ang asked whether there was any meeting in which it was explained why Angkar arranged the marriages. She answered that the party leaders said that Angkar “wanted to increase the force so marriage had to be arranged so children could be produced and the population could be increased.” She did not know at the time how children were produced and her mother told her that children were produced through the gap between her legs. She said she did not understand clearly at the time.
She did not understand the cadre’s statement. She learned from the married people that more people were needed for Angkar. Her husband’s name was Keo. “He was a handicapped person as a result of war.” His fingers and knee were handicapped and he could not see when he closed one eye. “He was a really really handicapped person.”
She heard a rumor from other women that handicapped men would marry the beautiful women. He had explained to her that she had already lost her virginity and that she could not have any other man. As for the loss of her virginity, she said that she felt regret for this. She usually listened to her parents’ advice and they had told her that she could give her virginity only to a man that she married of her own will. She said she should not have been married without the presence of her parents. There were fifty couples at the time. She was standing at the wedding arrangement. She left the wedding ceremony after observing for some time. Thirty or forty couples were arranged afterwards, and subsequently she was married.
Mr. Ang asked how many couples were at her wedding.[25] She replied that there were 15 couples including herself.
Pregnancy and Delivery of Baby
Ten days or more after her husband was arrested she delivered her baby. One month later, Yen came to her house and after looking at her baby said that her baby should be taken away and killed. She told Yen that if they were to kill her baby, they would have to kill her first. Upon hearing this, Yen left. “I felt so terrified.” Her bother told her to be strong, but she continued to weep. Yen had said that the child belonged to a father who was an enemy. She protested that the baby did not know what the policy of Angkar was.
After her husband was killed, she was linked to him and threatened at all times. Sometimes they said that she should not be kept, because she betrayed Angkar. With this, Mr. Ang concluded his line of questioning and the floor was handed to the Co-Prosecutors.
Senior Assistant Prosecutor Vincent de Wilde asked her about work after her delivery. She replied that she had to go back to work two months after her delivery. She had to cut palm trees. “It was really hard work for me.” She did not have sufficient food and became very thin. They did not have sufficient food, but they could find some at least. Mr. de Wilde asked why Angkar wanted to produce children but let them be together only three days a month. She replied that she did not know the policy of the party.[26] Children were separated from their parents and also required to work. “They said they wanted to build the country, but what for? People could not eat. People could live, but they could not eat sufficiently.” Children were required to respect Angkar, she said.
The President adjourned the hearing. It will continue Monday, October 24, at 9 am with the testimony of Ms. Preap Sokhoeum.
[1] E3/10699, at 01335193 (EN).
[2] E3/9644, at 01125304 (FR), 01085974-75 (KH).
[3] Ibid., at 01335066 (EN).
[4] E3/8177, at 001665991 (EN), 00631175-77 (KH), 00597761-62 (FR); E3/8272, at 0166112 (EN), 0083835 (KH), 00822432 (FR).
[5] E3/243.
[6] E3/1076.
[7] E3/2376, at 00192271 (EN), 00236981 (FR), 00191401-01 (KH); E1/386.1, at 15:57.
[8] At 01001771 (EN); E3/4640, April 1978, at 00519833 (EN), 00064713 (KH), 00520344 (FR).
[9] E3/10699, at 01335066 (EN).
[10] At 01001707 (EN).
[11] At 01001682 (EN), page 13.
[12] 01001992(EN).
[13] E1/237.1, at 10:36.
[14] At 0100776 (EN).
[15] E395/2, at paragraph 2.
[16] At 0100686 (EN).
[17] E3/10703, at 01335287 (EN).
[18] E3/9644, at 01085983 (EN), 0120084 (KH).
[19] E3/9723, at 01186945 (EN), 0130169 (KH).
[20] At page 105; E3/7338, at 01001772, and 1776 (EN).
[21] E3/1773, at 01246920 (EN).
[22] E3/2370, at 00344745 (FR), 00187393 (EN).
[23] E3/2376, at 00237080 (FR), 00191550 (KH), 001922401 (EN).
[24] The closest year of the monkey is 1956.
[25] E3/9820.
[26] E3/10710.
Featured Image: Civil Party Preap Sokhoeum (ECCC: Flickr).