Sam Rainsy, Cambodia’s primary opposition leader, received a sentence of 10 years imprisonment for “altering public documents and disinformation.” Rainsy had protested against Hun Sen’s decision to demarcate its border with Vietnam. He alleged that Phnom Penh had ceded territory to its northern neighbor, and even encouraged a village to uproot border markings. While this is obviously a sensitive issue for the regime, 10 years does seem like quite a long time for what is basically sedition. Of course, the Hun Sen regime claims the courts are independent and merely applying the law. But it also appears that, with China’s investment and aid, Hun Sen no longer feels compelled to moderate his authoritarian instincts.
Red Shirts for Juries
Thailand’s Red Shirts seem to have included fair trials in their list of demands for the Abhisit government. Typically, their demands have centered on socioeconomic issues and “justice” for Thaksin. Now, according to The Nation, Red Shirts in Chiang Mai are “calling for… a change in the justice system to more trials by jury.”
It would be interesting to see where this particular demand comes from. Thailand of course is a civil law country and has no jury system. Recently, other Asian civil law countries, such as Japan and Korea, have experimented with juries in criminal trials. Some research suggests jury trials reduce judicial corruption.
However, a jury trial might also be a means for Red Shirts, traditionally identified as populists in the political spectrum, to inject popular representation into the judiciary, which, as I’ve argued elsewhere, is still a fairly conservative institution. It could also have some resonance in delegitimizing the judiciary’s past decisions against Thaksin under the logic that such important criminal cases were not subjected to popular scrutiny.
In the current environment, I would be surprised if the Abhisit government did adopt jury trials. It will be interesting to see whether the rule of law NGOs operating in Thailand, such as the American Bar Association, throw their support behind jury trials…
Exorcism at the Supreme Court
Just when you think Philippine judicial politics can’t get any zanier… An activist priest performed an exorcism outside the Supreme Court protesting its decision to confirm the conviction of a man who had killed one of Marcos’ military intelligence officers. The case sends a signal to the elite that, while the Court might issue progressive opinions on some issues, it will not condone vigilante justice. In one sense at least, Arroyo can perhaps rest a bit easier…
Comments Off on Exorcism at the Supreme Court
Filed under Philippines, Supreme Court
More money, more money
The Philippine Supreme Court has seen President Aquino’s first budget, and it is upset. The Judiciary seldom gets much more than .8% of the budget. In 2007, the judiciary received only .76% of the national budget, in 2008, .88%, in 2009, .94%, and in 2010, .87%,” the SC lamented. However, according to PhilStar:
Court administrator and SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez earlier told the House committee on appropriations that they are asking for P27.1 billion, but Malacañang has cut the proposal to only P14.3 billion.
In other words, the current allocation is a mere .78% of the budget. It’s a significant cut for a judicial system that already suffers severe resource constraints. The Supreme Court issued a very strong statement condemning the budget. Here’s a particularly excitable excerpt:
Many of our judges and justices will continue to use their own personal computers and printers, repair their own courtrooms, work on weekends to declog their dockets… But until when can they last? Are we waiting for our justices and judges to march the streets, for the judiciary to revolt, for justice to ground to a halt? Are we courting chaos?
One interesting longer term question is whether this resource crisis will undermine the Philippine Judiciary’s independence. If judges have to beg the administration for more funding, will they be more susceptible to influence. One might think so. However, I personally hope the Philippine Supreme Court has enough of a sense of history to prevent that from happening. Based on Shadow of Doubt, I’m not so sure, but I suspect the Court might become more moderate over the next few years OR become increasingly involved in issues that concern the elites (and thereby building a stronger base of political support). As always with the Philippines, these are interesting times…
Comments Off on More money, more money
Filed under Philippines, Supreme Court
Burmese justice
I can’t recall ever seeing the Burmese junta taking legal action against one of its own soldiers in order to punish high-profile human-rights abuses. Yet, that’s what it appears might just happen in response to a shooting in Pegu. According to the government-run New Light of Myanmar, a lawsuit will be filed against the soldiers who shot two residents dead after a dispute. The junta still blames pro-democracy elements for inciting the incident, but is suggesting that the soldiers deserve to be subjected to legal scrutiny (of course, whether it results in conviction is another story). This type of response is very rare – indeed, I can’t recall seeing anything like it before. I’ll make sure to follow the case, and what it might imply about the military courts under the new constitution. (Irrawaddy has more details on the story).
Comments Off on Burmese justice
Filed under Burma, military justice
Dominic J. Nardi, Jr. 
You must be logged in to post a comment.