Monday, December 1, 2014

# 52 Another request to the Cambodian Minister of Justice to allow David Fletcher a trial that is in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure

Mr Ang Vong Vathana
Minister of Justice
Samdech Sothearos Road
Sangkat Chaktomouk
Daun Penh

1st Dec. 2014

Dear Mr Ang Vong Vathana

re David John Fletcher

Following on from my letter of 24th Nov.

Mr Fletcher has one, perhaps two weeks to live. Whilst the decision to die has been made by David Fletcher himself, the circumstances that have led to his giving up all hope for the future are not of his making. Judges in the Phnom Penh Municipal Court have failed to adhere to the basic principles outlined in the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure. I have attached a document revealing the ways in which the judges have, on more than one occasion now, failed to provide Mr Fletcher with even the semblance of a fair trial. This is in the form of a statement to the judges that they refused to allow him to read. (see attached ‘David Fletcher statement for court 20.11.14’)

I have posted online two interviews I conducted with the alleged rape victim, Yang Dany, and her mother Kheang Sekun. In these interviews both mother and daughter make it clear that Mr Fletcher did not rape Yang Dany. Their statements to this effect are backed up by the doctor’s report prepared for the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in Sept 2010 that declared Yang Dany to be a virgin still, despite her allegations of having been ‘brutally raped’ in March the previous year - 2009.

In addition to the doctor’s report and the confessions of Yang Dany and Kheang Sekun there is the fact that David Fletcher was not in Cambodia on 15th and 22nd March 2009 – the dates upon which he allegedly raped Yang Dany.

On 20th Nov the three judges of the Phnom Penh Municipal Court refused to consider this or any other evidence that Mr Fletcher had prepared for his defense. Indeed, at one point Mr Fletcher handed his evidence up to the judges and they handed it back to him. They had already made up their mind not to grant him the re-trial they had promised him three weeks earlier. This was made apparent when, after a 15 minute break, the main judge came back and read a 5 page summary of the reasons why Mr Fletcher was being denied a re-trial. This document had clearly been written before the court proceedings had begun that morning. The reasoning behind the decision to refuse a re-trial had nothing to do with facts, evidence or the truth. They had purely and simply to do with the fact that Mr Fletcher had not lodged particular documents with the court in time. This was not Mr Fletcher’s fault – as acknowledged by the director of the prison in which he is incarcerated.

There has been a gross miscarriage of justice here and you are the only person, now, who can step in, override the judges’ unfair decision to disallow a re-trial and insist that Mr Fletcher be provided with a trial in accordance with the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure. I ask that you do so Mr Ang Vong Vathana before  Mr Fletcher dies.

If, in an open court, able to defend himself, to call witnesses, Mr Fletcher is found guilty on the basis of evidence that has been tested by the court, he will willingly accept his punishment. If he is found to be ‘not guilty’ there should be an investigation into how it came to be that he was falsely charged in the first place. Such an investigation would have to focus on the modus operandi of Actions Pour les Enfants – the NGO that has known, since Sept 2010, that Yang Dany was a virgin and could not have been raped. Despite this knowledge, APLE has relentlessly pursued Mr Fletcher in its attempt (successful) to see an innocent man jailed.

The interviews with Yang Dany and Kheang Sekun can be found at:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqHpFO0cauc

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU9zpkYMCEo

If, after viewing these essentially uncut videos, you have any doubts at all,  Mr Ang Vong Vathana, about the decision to refuse Mr Fletcher a re-trial, I trust that you will do all within your power to insist that the judges grant him a re-trial.

I should point out at this point, lest there be any confusion, that Mr Fletcher has never appeared before a court that adhered to the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure.

yours sincerely


James Ricketson

David Fletcher’s statement to the court of 20th Nov that the judges refused to allow him to present to the court.
Your Honours
I apologize that this document is written and spoken in English but owing to my being jail it has not been possible for me to have it translated into Khmer. 
Article 44. Opening of Judicial Investigation
“In the case of a felony, the Prosecutor shall open a judicial investigation. The judicial investigation shall be based upon the initial submission provided to the investigating judge. The initial submission (to be prepared by the Prosecutor) includes: A summary of the facts…. The initial submission shall be dated and signed.
 These formalities shall be strictly complied with or the initial submission shall be void.”
I was not provided with a signed and dated summary of the facts before my trial?
Article 93. Interrogation Records
“For each interrogation, a written record shall be established. The written record shall be an accurate account of the interrogated person’s responses. The interrogated person shall sign or affix his finger-print to each page of the written record.”
I was not provided with copies of signed statements by Yang Dany and her mother Kheang Sekun?
Article 124. Introductory Submissions
“In compliance with Article 44 (Commencement of Judicial Investigation) of this Code, a judicial investigation is opened by the introductory submission of the Royal Prosecutor….An investigating judge may not conduct any investigative acts in the absence of an introductory submission.”
I was not provided with a copy of this ‘introductory submission’? If there was no ‘introductory submission’, no investigation could have taken place in accordance with Cambodian law.
Article 127. Investigation of Inculpatory and Exculpatory Evidence
“An investigating judge, in accordance with the law, performs all investigations that he deems useful to ascertaining the truth. An investigating judge has the obligation to collect inculpatory as well as exculpatory evidence.”
No investigating or trial judge, no policeman, no member of the Anti-Human Trafficking unit has ever asked me to present exculpatory evidence in support of my insistence that I am not guilty
Article 133. Investigative Actions Requested by Charged Persons
”At any time during a judicial investigation, the charged person may ask the investigating judge to interrogate him, question a civil party or witness, conduct a confrontation or visit a site. The request shall be in writing with a statement of reasons. If the investigating judge does not grant the request, he shall issue a rejection order within one month after receiving the request. This order shall state the reasons. The Prosecutor and the charged person shall be notified of the order without delay.”

I have never been informed that I had a legal right to ask the investigating judge to interrogate me. This would have been difficult, of course because I was in jail in Thailand.
Article 143. Notification of Placement under Judicial Investigation
“When a charged person appears for the first time, the investigating judge shall check his identity, inform him of the imputed act and its legal qualification, and receive his statement after informing him of the right to remain silent. This notification shall be mentioned in the written record of the first appearance.”
I have never been informed of my right to remain silent? I have never appeared before an investigating judge to answer questions?
Article 126. Placing Suspect under Judicial Investigation
“The investigating judge shall inform the charged person of his rights to choose a lawyer or to have a lawyer appointed according to the Law on the Bar.” 
I was never informed by an investigating judge of my right to either choose a lawyer or have one appointed? I was not aware that a trial was taking place until after it had been completed?
Article 145. Presence of Lawyer during  Interrogation
“When a charged person has a lawyer, the investigating judge shall summons the lawyer at least five days before the interrogation takes place. During that period, the lawyer may examine the case file. A charged person can be interrogated only in the presence of his lawyer.”  
As I had no lawyer it was not possible for the investigating judge summon him 5 days before an interrogation. No interrogation has ever taken place.
Article 206. Statement of Charged Persons and Reasons for Provisional Detention
“The investigating judge who orders the provisional detention of a charged person shall issue an order containing reasons. The investigating judge’s reasons in the order shall be based on the provisions of Article 205 (Reasons for Provisional Detention) of this Code. The Royal Prosecutor and the charged person shall be immediately notified of the decision.” 
I was not notified of the reasons why I was charged.
Article 247. Closing Order
“If the judge considers that the facts constitute a felony, a misdemeanor or a petty offense, he shall decide to indict the charged person before the trial court. The order shall state the facts being charged and their legal qualifications.”
I have never been provided with an order that states the facts relating to the charges made against me.
Article 252. Mandatory Rules
“128 (Assistance of Court Clerks) of this Code. Proceedings shall also be null and void if the violation of any substantial rule or procedure stated in the Code or any provisions concerning criminal procedure affects the interests of the concerned party. Especially, rules and procedures which intend to guarantee the rights of the defense have a substantial nature.”
I believe that many violations of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure have occurred and that I am entitled, in accordance with Cambodian law, to a re-trial.
  Article 305. Appearance of Accused upon Indictment
“According to Article 249 (Provisions of Closing Orders in Relation to Provisional Detention and Judicial Supervision) of this Code, the order to keep the accused in provisional detention will expire after four months. If the accused has not been brought before the court within this period, the accused shall be automatically released. A judgment on the merits of the case shall be made within a reasonable time period.” 
I have been in jail for four and a half years now, unable to unable to present a defense to the Phnom Penh Municipal court.
Article 316. Public Nature of Trial Hearing and Confidentiality
“Trial hearings shall be conducted in public. However, the court may order a complete or partial in-camera hearing, if it considers that a public hearing will cause a significant danger to the public order or morality.”
Did thePhnom Penh Municipal court order an in-camera hearing because it believed that the facts of this case were likely to cause a significant danger to the public order or morality?
Article 318. Establishment of Order in Hearing
“The presiding judge shall conduct and lead the trial hearing. The presiding judge shall guarantee the free exercise of the right to defense.”
As I was not in court on the day of the trial I did not have free exercise of my right to a defense.
Article 321. Evidence Evaluation by Court
“Unless it is provided otherwise by law, in criminal cases all evidence is admissible. The court has to consider the value of the evidence submitted for its examination, following the judge’s intimate conviction….The judgment of the court may be based only on the evidence included in the case file or which has been presented at the hearing.”
Why was evidence that had no bearing at all on the charges that had been laid against me (rape) allowed to be introduced by NGOs?
Article 325. Interrogation of Accused
“The presiding judge shall inform the accused of the charges that he is accused of and conduct the questioning of the accused. The presiding judge shall ask any questions which he believes to be conducive to ascertaining the truth. The presiding judge has a duty to ask the accused both inculpatory and exculpatory questions.”
At no time did the presiding judge inform me of the charges that had been laid against me.  At no time did the presiding judge question me. I was in jail in Thailand at the time of the trial.
I submit to the court that there have been sufficient breaches of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure to render the original verdict of ‘guilty’ to be null and void.



No comments:

Post a Comment