Phnom Penh (Cambodia). 26/02/2006: Chum Mey, one of the three S-21 survivors still alive, demonstrating how he was detained in a cell©John Vink/ Magnum (archive)
Ka-set
http://cambodia.ka-set.info/
By Stéphanie Gée
01-07-2009
A second S-21 survivor was called to testify in Duch’s trial and again, the frustration, already felt on the previous day during Vann Nath’s hearing, arose to see the court not measuring up sufficiently to this key moment of the trial. Tuesday June 30th, Chum Mey, a prisoner who was tortured in S-21 and joined as a civil party in Duch’s trial, was able at last to share his story with the public, but was treated, on too many instances, without the signs of respect that never failed to be shown to the accused. An inversion of roles? For the last three weeks, the trial has been managed more efficiently and the effort is quite commendable. However, that should not be at the expense of respect during debates.
Only the “hot” method was used in S-21, according to Chum Mey
When he arrived in the courtroom, the witness greeted, with hands pressed together, the audience and each of the parties to the trial. Chum Mey, still alert at 79, was a mechanic in Phnom Penh before the fateful April 17th 1975. After the cheers that greeted the arrival of the Khmer Rouge troops in the capital, he was ordered, like everyone else, to leave the city. He recounted the exodus, which cost the life of his two-year-old son. Then, as the Angkar was looking for mechanics, he was recruited to repair sewing machines in a cooperative in Phnom Penh, in charge of manufacturing the new revolutionary outfit, the black pyjamas. On October 28th 1978, he and other workers were called to go and repair vehicles for an offensive launched against Vietnam, as they were explained. In fact, they were taken to S-21, where they were immediately beaten severely. “The method used was very brutal. There was no hot or cold method, as Duch said. It was always the hot method. And we were called ‘despicable this or that,’” the frail and talkative survivor recalled.
If Duch had tortured, he would not be still alive
In the interrogation room that still smelled of fresh blood, he was asked to “tell the truth,” how many of them had joined the CIA or KGB. “I put my hands together and I begged them to spare me. They told me not to do that because they were not monks. I said I didn’t know anything, I didn’t know what the CIA or KGB were. And that was the truth. I didn’t know.” For calling his future torturers “Lok” (Sir), he received fifty blows. For calling them “bong” (brother), he was hit hundreds of times. “One day, while I was being interrogated, I raised my hand to protect myself and the blow I was given broke my finger. Another day, they pulled out my nails. I was shaking with pain. Shortly afterwards, they electrocuted me, with cables connected to the wall where the electricity arrived. […] I since discovered that three of the individuals who tortured me passed away. Duch didn’t hit me directly, otherwise he would not see the light of day today.” The president intervened: “Please avoid personal attacks on those most responsible under the Khmer Rouge regime. […] Avoid verbal attacks on the accused or any other individual.” Chum Mey later confided he never saw the accused committing acts of torture during his detention. In any case, he did not know him at the time.
On his arrival at S-21, Chum Mey was subjected to an intensive interrogation for twelve days and twelve nights, including constant insults and abuses. His ordeal ended when his torturers discovered he was a mechanic and he could be useful in the centre. He then repaired sewing machines, typewriters, a water pump… He was moved from an individual cell to a collective cell. But prior to that, he had to acknowledge he was part of a network of traitors working for the US and Soviet secret services.
Indecency in the discussion of torture
As Chum Mey persisted in saying he did not know the CIA or KGB, he was lashed with a cane on a daily basis, many times in S-21, he said. His torturers then resorted to pliers to pull out his toenails. President Nil Nonn: “And the nail was gone?” “Yes, the nail was completely detached from my toe,” the witness confirmed. “They twisted the nail with the pliers and as it didn’t come off, they pulled it out.” “Do you mean the whole nail was pulled or only part of it?”, the judge insisted. “The whole nail.” “Did the nail grow back?” “Yes, but it grew deformed.” “Can you show us the now deformed nail?” Chum Mey complied. He stood up, came before the judges and took his shoes off. “Technician, can you show the feet of the civil party on the screen?”, Nil Nonn requested. The video zoomed on the feet. One couldn’t see anything, but the judge kept showing a voyeur’s satisfied smile. “So, if I understand correctly, they pulled out the toenails of both feet?” “Yes.” “In one go?” “No. They pulled out the nails of one foot on one day, and those of the other foot on another day.”
Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 30/06/2009: On the insistent request of president Nil Nonn, Chum Mey rose to show the effects of torture he was inflicted on his toenails
©Stéphanie Gée
Twice, Chum Mey was inflicted electroshocks and lost consciousness both times, he said. “You said these electroshocks were not carried out as described by the accused, that is with a manual dynamo, but that it was real electric current, 220 volts, that came from the socket – the regular voltage used in offices. Is that correct? And they placed electric wires on your ears?” The civil party confirmed. “The accused stated that electroshocks were carried out only with a hand dynamo. But in real practice, it seems that interrogators actually used electricity coming from the socket. So, maybe they were acting without the knowledge of the accused,” Nil Nonn inferred, quite inappropriately.
The genocidal intention
Chum Mey explained his wish was that justice be given to him. “The tribunal is very important to me. I have attended the hearings regularly [as a civil party]. I want to understand how it works. Every night, I cry. Every time I hear people talk about the Khmer Rouge, it brings back the memory of my wife and my [four] children who disappeared under the Khmer Rouge. [He took his handkerchief out.] I am mentally ill.” His voice choked.
Interrogated by judge Cartwright, Chum Mey made a very powerful statement: “At the centre, I saw old toothless women and babies. I didn’t see how they could be [CIA or KGB] agents. I would like to have an explanation. I am convinced that’s genocidal intention.”
It was time for the co-Prosecutors’ questions. The international co-Prosecutor, Robert Petit, again disappeared, replaced by his deputy, William Smith. The prosecution questions barely brought anything to the debate, while the president kept reminding Chum Mey, on a most condescending tone, that he had to wait for “the little red light” to appear on his microphone before answering.
A lawyer abrupt with his own client
Then it was the turn of the civil party lawyers. Chum Mey’s two defenders asked to speak first. Hong Kim Soun asked him what his reaction was when he received his summons to the Trial Chamber. “I was overwhelmed by happiness. It was clear to me that I would be able to testify to shed light on these events for the Chamber and to say the truth. It was a great relief. If I had not been able to come and testify before you, I would have remained deeply affected. I wanted to relieve myself of what I have to say.” “I will never be able to forget what I endured in S-21 until the day I die,” the witness declared a little later. “And it is only after you have given justice that I will feel better.” When his lawyer asked him what he felt today when he heard the name of “Tuol Sleng,” he said he could not hold his tears back. “I don’t know what will happen to me in the future, because I cannot control these tears…” He confided he was followed by a psychological support organisation. While Chum Mey was overwhelmed by emotion, his lawyer coldly asked him to collect himself as he had only limited time to ask him questions…
Chum Mey’s questions to the accused
Then, his international lawyer, Silke Studzinsky, invited him to ask the questions he had prepared for the accused. The president did not oppose it. Chum Mey wanted to know from Duch if “all the CIA agents were smashed or if some remained alive.” The question created surprise, but later made sense, when the witness went through a moment of anger at the memory of the question that he kept being asked about his being a CIA agent. Who decided to focus the interrogations on the CIA and KGB and why accuse someone to be an agent when all he had done was to break a tool, for instance, the civil party wondered with irritation. Like Vann Nath, Chum Mey showed a similar incomprehension, thirty years later, over being arrested when he had committed no fault and under a completely fabricated and incongruous reason.
Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 30/06/2009: “I never looked at [the guards and interrogators] straight in the eye. […] I was too scared to look at their face,” Chum Mey said during his testimony at Duch’s trial©Stéphanie Gée
Duch answered on the professor tone he was so fond of. “I would like to specify that, as you have attended the trial for a long time, you must therefore know that CIA refers to any person who belonged to the enemy camp, and not to anyone receiving a salary from the United States. By CIA, we meant all the enemies of the CPK [Communist Party of Kampuchea]. There were still CIA members and they defeated the CPK. So, there is the real CIA and the CIA as perceived by the CPK. Those two are distinct. […] As for the enemies, I do not think we got rid of them.”
The witness’ second question was that Duch explain what the Angkar was. Students he accompanied to Tuol Sleng asked him and he was unable to answer. “I would like to tell Mr. Chum Mey that by ‘Angkar,’ we meant the Standing Committee and we also referred to the Angkar,” Duch replied. This time, the accused referred politely to the witness, whose name he evoked in the past under the contemptuous term “a-Chum Mey” (“a”: the despicable).
In S-21, detainees were left to their own devices
Martine Jacquin, co-lawyer for group 3, took over. “When you were detained in S-21, did you ever have the impression that the guards, the interrogators or other staff members were scared or terrorised?” “During my detention, I never looked at them straight in the eye,” the civil party answered. “I looked at the floor when we crossed each other’s path. […] I was too scared to look at them in the face.” He later explained he did not talk about the torture he suffered with the other prisoners, even discreetly, and that no cooperation existed between them. “Nobody could help anyone. We were all alone. How could we help each other when we were shackled? […] If we didn’t ask the guards’ authorisation to move, we were beaten.” He wondered how it could have been possible to trust his fellow detainees without being able to communicate with them, which they were deterred from by the high vigilance of the guards.
All the dead won’t be forgotten with Duch’s tears
On the defence side, Kar Savuth reminded him that during the reconstruction of events in S-21, when Duch read his statement of apologies to all the victims, the survivor said he had been “waiting for these words for nearly thirty years.” “Do you remember saying that?” “Yes, I have said that.” “Can you comment further on this statement?” “I have waited for many years to hear Duch say such words,” Chum Mey repeated. “Because at the start, he said he was an intellectual, a teacher, and he wouldn’t be easily distressed… I thought he had realised he had killed people and I thought he would never be able to say that. That is the reason why, when I saw him cry in Tuol Sleng, I told him those words. However, I will not use a few tears to forget the souls of thousands of people who were killed in Tuol Sleng.”
Chum Mey’s interrogation reached an end. He was not thanked for his testimony, unlike all the previous witnesses called to the stand.
No comments:
Post a Comment