Phnom Penh (Cambodia). 04/03/2002: Cell numbers in former Khmer Rouge detention centre S-21©John Vink/Magnum
Ka-set
http://cambodia.ka-set.info/
By Stéphanie Gée
04-08-2009
The hearing on Monday August 3rd hardly contributed to enlighten the tribunal. The first witness to appear left the feeling of a complete loss of time due to the thinness of his testimony. One failed to understand why some witnesses were called to the stand when they had nothing to say and why the prosecution, who suggested their names, did not attempt to demonstrate the interest in calling them to testify. The former S-21 staff member who succeeded him proved to have a better memory and was subjected to many questions which were thought to have been exhausted already… As for the accused, he relished noting the contradictions in their statements and gladly made reservations, in the lack of evidence proving they belonged to the staff under his direction.
A witness with limited memory and knowledge
Sek Dân, a 48-year-old dark-skinned farmer, was unable to sit still on his chair. He writhed with nervousness, ill-at-ease. The president informed him of his rights and duties, but the new witness struggled to understand what they meant. Khmer Rouge militia men conscripted him in his village while he was still only a child, he explained in response to the judge’s initial questions. Sent to a children’s brigade near Phnom Penh after a short training, he “hauled soil.” He was not good at remembering dates. He said he was sent in 1978 to S-21, where he joined the caregivers and was assigned the task of distributing medication, mostly to prisoners, “under the supervision of an adult.” There were no girls in his team.
As for the accused, he only saw him from time to time and from a distance. “[Duch] was the big boss then and I did not dare to look at him in the eye.” The detainees he was led to care for essentially suffered from diarrhoea, fever, and bore wounds and bruises on their back and limbs, he reported, adding that “some of them no longer had any nails.” As for the medication he administered them, he failed to give any precise information: “medication for diarrhoea for those who had diarrhoea, medication to heal wounds…” He specified that their peculiarity was that they usually had a “rabbit dropping” shape and were black. He had no idea what they were made of but claimed these remedies were produced “locally,” only since 1975. What about their efficiency? “Some were efficient, others were not. Once, I ingested a handful of them because I was so hungry, but it had absolutely no effect on me…”
Based on the screams he heard at night and the information he heard from the prisoners he treated, Sek Dân found out very quickly that their wounds originated in torture sessions they were subjected to. “During the time I worked at S-21, many prisoners – hundreds probably – died of illness. […] We, the children in the medical staff and the doctors, were asked to take the bodies away and bury them close to the building […].” As for suicides, he was aware of that of his team leader, Yoeun, who hung himself, fearing a fate similar to that of his predecessor Paov, who was arrested on the same allegations: an injection error that had resulted in the death of a detainee. He had realised, without receiving any instruction saying so, that his mission was not to heal but “to keep the detainees alive only for the duration of the interrogation” because they would gradually “disappear.”
Duch’s suspicions
“Do you recognise the accused today?”, judge Lavergne asked him. “I see him in the courtroom,” the witness answered, prompting a little smile from Duch. “Are you still scared of him today?” “I am much older today and I am no longer afraid of him.” Duch smiled again. As for him, did he recognise the witness? No, he did not and he expressed doubt that he could have been a member of S-21 medical staff. He noted the inconsistencies in his story, chronological ones in particular. “His memory is often mistaken. Let me give examples of it. He said he was now 48 years old, which means he was born in 1961. Yet, to judge Thou Mony, he said he arrived at S-21 when he was 11 years old and he repeated that to judge Lavergne…” The accused concluded: “I would like new documents relative to S-21 staff to be found. Then, I could finally make up my mind on whether Sek Dân was a staff member or not. Maybe the co-Prosecutors can help us on this point…”
The prosecution in fault
Turn of the prosecution, who suggested this witness but failed to present any document proving his past functions at S-21, as for the previous witnesses they submitted to the Chamber. Yet, there exist, among others, surviving lists of certain units of S-21 staff but it seemed that the co-Prosecutors had not deemed it useful to use them…
Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 03/08/2009: Sek Dân, lost and unsettled by questions and ill-at-ease in his role as a witness, during Duch’s trial©Stéphanie Gée
The Cambodian co-Prosecutor came very quickly to one of his team’s favourite exercises: showing on the screen a photograph of Tuol Sleng today and inviting the witness to indicate on it the places he mentioned in his testimony. Once again, the witness got lost in this exercise. It may be useful to show first pictures of S-21 taken in 1979, which do exist, rather than presenting immediately a contemporary view of the site, somewhat transformed now. The co-Prosecutor was convinced his approach was right and said so, a tad emphatically: “We would like the witness to confirm this is the building where he used to work. For the purposes of the minutes and for future generations, it is important to mark this building, so we know if building ‘C’ was the one where the witness used to work.” Silence. Sek Dân did not react. The president intervened: “Co-Prosecutor, could you give us a hard copy of this photograph? The Chamber itself is struggling to follow you, not to say anything about the witness or the public.” Sek Dân’s lawyer confirmed. And Nil Nonn added, to make sure his remark was understood: “Please keep in mind that the witness has a limited knowledge… […] If your question goes beyond his understanding, we are going to lose time.” The co-Prosecutor was allowed to go next to the witness to help him make sense of the photograph. Then, to the surprise of all, he talked in a low voice with the witness. The president put an end to the procedural breach: “Co-Prosecutor, you cannot converse privately with the witness. You must simply indicate and explain things to the witness publicly, so that the Chamber and the public understand what you are explaining. Otherwise, one will have the impression you are influencing the witness.” The co-Prosecutor turned the microphone on.
The civil party lawyers were quick as, indeed, this witness’ interrogation brought hardly anything to the debates.
A witness who does not understand his rights and duties
Floor to the defence. One did no understand why the witness eluded some of Kar Savuth’s questions with “I do not wish to answer” while it was about returning to technical points of his story which, under no circumstances, incriminated him. But nobody intervened. Sek Dân was probably intimidated and struggling to understand what was going on, preferring to protect himself with a misunderstood right to remain silent rather than to repeat he did not understand the questions or did not know how to answer them.
Next was François Roux, Duch’s international co-lawyer, who also sought to highlight the contradictions in the witness’ story. Following the accused, he returned to the seeming inaccuracy in his birth date, which led to believe he was actually 14 and not 11 in 1975. “I am not very good at mathematics. I would prefer not to answer,” Sek Dân apologised awkwardly. After a second similar response, the French lawyer reminded him he could refuse to questions that may incriminate him, “but not other questions.” The witness then admitted he did not understand the question. The president also intervened, as didactically as possible, so that Sek Dân distinguished between the questions which he can refuse to answer and those he must answer truthfully. The witness struggled and made no secret of it. Nil Nonn then invited the witness’ counsel to clarify things for his client.
The defence doubts the veracity of the testimony
The lawyer resumed and sought to re-establish a consistent factual chronology. But the witness maintained his statement. In answer to his questions, Sek Dân said he recalled Paov was killed the year he arrived at S-21, that is early 1978, and his next group leader, Yoeun, hang himself before the Vietnamese troops arrived.
Again invited to talk, Duch maintained scepticism in relation to the statement he heard. He was careful to highlight first that Sek Dân was a farmer’s son with “limited” memory and education, before justifying his position: Paov was executed before 1978, he claimed forcefully. If Yoeun had killed himself, as the director of S-21, he would have known about it, which was not the case… “This testimony is plausible overall, but the points I raised make me doubt the veracity of the witness’ statements.” His hand on his heart, the witness confirmed he had worked at S-21 and added: “Those who were with me can prove it,” like a former guard named “Mith.” He was thanked for his statement. Half a day was lost.
New witness
Before the next witness entered the room, François Roux observed an “abnormality:” there was no French translation of his statement to the co-Investigating Judges while an English translation was made… since October 2007.
Kambol (Phnom Penh, Cambodia). 03/08/2009: Lak Mieung, a witness more at ease… in an oversized jacket©Stéphanie Gée
Lak Mieung, a 52-year-old farmer, took his seat. He was recruited as a member of the militia in his commune in 1974 before becoming a soldier. Shortly after April 1975, he was sent to the technical military school of Takhmau, before being assigned to a unit as guard. Then, he worked at the main prison in the police headquarters in Phnom Penh, until the prison was moved to Tuol Sleng. After arriving at S-21, he became a guard on duty outside the cells and buildings, within the compound, according to a system of shifts, before being appointed as a typist to record the prisoners’ confessions and then, late 1978, an interrogator. The witness’ dark jacket hung off him and looked identical to that worn by Sek Dân and the other former S-21 staff members who succeeded before him at the stand. He visibly looked more relaxed than his predecessor and even dared to cast a glance to the side of the accused.
Used-up usual questions
In response to judge Ya Sokhan’s questions, he claimed he had seen Vietnamese prisoners “in great numbers,” maybe between 100 and 200, who arrived by trucks at S-21 “in late 1978” and for most, locked in collective cells in the North building. The judge did not fail to ask him how the prisoners were set in the cells, what clothes they wore, whether they had to request the guard’s authorisation to stand up, what food rations they received, how they washed, etc. Questions already heard dozens of times.
How one becomes an interrogator
Lak Mieung explained he did not learn interrogation techniques in a manual, but with an experienced interrogator who supervised him. He had to observe how the latter proceeded to extract confessions from prisoners and identify their networks. Under his supervision, he interrogated a dozen prisoners, then three or four on his own, before Phnom Penh was captured by the Vietnamese. But he said he did not remember the names of those he had to make confess. Also, he was not aware of the existence of teams assigned to the “hot,” “cold” or “chewing” methods. The witness said he only met Duch at the dining hall and the political school.
Duch’s phone calls
“I would receive the order to interrogate a prisoner by writing. It was my team leader, […] [who changed] at various periods, who transmitted me the order. I would receive a instruction letter and I would go and get the person in his cell and interrogate him.” The letter was signed by the team leader, but it did not have the name of the person who had written the text, Lak Mieung specified. When he had finished with an interrogation, Hor, Duch’s deputy, would come and ask him his findings. Then, he would present his interrogation report to his team leader, but never to the accused, because “you had to go through the chain of command.” No, he never received any annotated document asking him to continue an interrogation. Once he had reported a prisoner’s confessions to his supervisors, if any uncertainties remained, Duch would eventually call him directly on the phone to ask him further questions. “It happened,” the witness claimed, saying he was certain he could clearly recognise the voice of the accused at the time. Beyond the interrogation stage, Lak Mieung knew nothing about what happened to the prisoners, he claimed.
Violence against detainees, on Hor’s instigation
“Were the interrogators empowered to torture or did they have to request authorisation?”, the judge asked. “Violence against detainees was not authorised for ordinary interrogators like myself. We could possibly insult or threaten the prisoner, but we were forbidden from mistreating him physically.” Instructions received from the unit chief. “What if, for instance, a detainee did not give full confessions and torture was used against him. Who gave the order?”, Ya Sokhan continued. “In such cases, it was Hor who would personally come and see us and order us to take a stick [to hit the detainee].” As for Duch, he never exhorted him to resort to torture against any detainee, Lak Mieung declared. However, “during studying sessions, we were taught how to use torture during interrogations.” “Duch gave us these trainings, but he was not the one who ordered us to use torture in specific cases. He told us to start by talking about politics to obtain the confessions we sought. […] Most often, it was Hor who resorted to torture.” Aside from branches and electroshocks, Lak Mieung said he did not see other instruments or techniques or torture.
Lak Mieung says he recognised Sek Dân
As for the medical staff, he did not note any female member, but remembered seeing Sek Dân, who testified in the morning. He recognised his face, saying he had kept the memory of “teenage” members, and not children, in that team. “I knew [Sek Dân] well because we were in the same training.” Judge Lavergne then asked him if he remembered noting, in the interrogation rooms, any instructions posted on the walls. Lak Mieung said he did not. “What I learned, I learned it from other interrogators.”
Duch “hesitates to confirm”
Did the accused recognise Lak Mieung as a former S-21 staff member? Duch “hesitated to confirm.” If nothing in this witness’ testimony incriminated him directly, he expressed his rejection that some people sought to associate themselves with S-21, a “criminal mechanism,” and claimed they were part of it when it was not the case. He listed some details in the witness’ testimony that arose his “suspicions,” in particular his claim he used to call him to talk with him about prisoners’ interrogations, a “very strange thing.” The accused hoped to be able to shed light on this witness and added that if Lak Mieung could remember the names of the people he had interrogated, it would things easier.
(translated from French by Ji-Sook Lee)
No comments:
Post a Comment