After Dr.Gavin Scott's release he had this to say:
Some thoughts from Dr. Gavin Scott, English now Khmer from
Phnom Penh Cambodia
Sex is something we are all interested in, whether it be
performing or talking. Media stories about sex sell, and stories about underage
sex sell even more but what exactly are the motives of the people putting out
such stories, and how accurate are they? By manipulating words and figures
minor problems can be presented as issues of far greater magnitude. A review
then of the building blocks that make up such stories is essential before
conclusions can be made.
What is a Child, and what is a Minor? A child is a term
defined by cultural, medical and social usage, whereas a minor is a term
defined by law meaning 'under full legal age'. The words child and minor are
not interchangeable as they have different meanings. Sex with a minor -
underage sex - is not necessarily child sex; for example, an adult male
homosexual of 20 in Western Australia is considered a minor; conversely, until
recently, a Sri Lankan female child of 12 was not considered a minor.
From doctors to dictionaries it becomes clear that children
are consistently perceived and defined as persons below the age of 14 years: 'a
child is 0 -14 years' (Royal College of Physicians UK); in terms of response to
drugs a child is 0 -12 years (BNF), 0 -15 years (Pharmaceutical companies) - an
adult dosage applies to 16 years and above; 'a young person of either sex
before puberty' (Oxford Reference Dictionary). Most businesses - airlines,
hotels, restaurants, cinemas, trains etc. - refer to children as under 12 -14.
Most societies around the world regard puberty as the time
at which a child becomes an adult, albeit a young adult; in neighbouring
Thailand on a youth's 12th birthday, parents will perform the Phiti Kon Juk,
during which they shave off their child's top knot and recognise them as a
young responsible adult. Similarly, as the National Geographic (October 1964
edition) wrote, '(in Cambodia) when the child reaches puberty, at a time set by
the astrologer, the lock is cut by the achar and the monks. The child
officially becomes an adult'. At the killing fields monument at Choeung Ek a
sign reads 'Juvenile male Kampuchean from 15 to 20 years'.
For immigration purposes a child is under 16
(International Organisation for Migration). Even the United Nations uses
similar ages - but more about the UN later!
What is Abuse and what is Paedophilia? 'A person is
considered to be abused if he or she is treated in a way that is unacceptable
in a given culture at a given time'. The key word here is 'culture'. When
foreign Christian NGOs complain that Cambodian society does not consider
consentual sex with a 14 year-old girl abuse they display crass cultural
insensitivity exacerbated by their avowed determination to 'educate' the Khmers
and inculcate Christian values in Buddhists.
Paedophilia is 'a preference for repetitive sexual
activity with pre-pubertal children' (medical definition), and paedophiles are
'those who are primarily sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children' (World
Congress Against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, Stockholm 1996).
What are the legal ages of consent for sex around the
world? In the majority of European countries the age of consent is set at 14-16
years of age. =14 years in Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Estonia,
Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Russia, Slovenia & Yugoslavia. =15 years in
the Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece & Slovakia. =16 years in Australia
(NSW, Victoria, West Australia), Belgium, Finland, France, Iceland, Latvia,
Luxemberg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland,
Ukraine & the UK.
Most, if not all, have ratified the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child, but have decided that the above ages, and not 18, are the
ages of majority (this is consistent with the convention - see explanation
later). These independent countries made these decisions on sound legal and
medical grounds; they recognised that many persons start sexual relations at an
early age, and to criminalise such behaviour would be harmful; lawmakers
recognise that a law that is unenforceable is a bad law (such as prohibition in
1920s America); furthermore they acknowledged that 'peoples sexuality was well
formed by the age of 16' (European Court and British Medical Association).
It is therefore unacceptable that NGOs from the above
countries, who have no mandate to, or hope of, changing the laws in their own
countries, come to Cambodia which is vulnerable to media pressure and NGO power
politics, and try to change Cambodian laws. It is no secret that Thailand was
forced to increase the age of consent from 15 to 18 under American pressure
following misleading media stories about prostitution; that a sovereign country
is deliberately embarrassed by NGOs and then forced by economic blackmail to
change a domestic law is nothing short of imperialism, and the imposition of
American cultural values.
The United Nations and UN Conventions As Madeleine Bunting
recently wrote in the Guardian Weekly: ' ...UN conventions."are a modern
version of the Beatitudes, our vision of the Kingdom of God. It's no accident
that many UN secretaries-general have been deeply religious".'. The charge
of hypocrisy is levelled at the UN, just as it is at any other faith-based
organization. This opens up the vexed relationship between idealism and
reality.' There are over 500 UN conventions and it is reasonable to say that
every day some article in some convention in some country is violated by
someone in some government or some NGO. It is important to reiterate the point
therefore that a UN convention is a set of ideals largely framed by the religious
beliefs of its makers.
The USA is the main funder of the UN, and as a consequence
there are many who regard the UN as a rubber stamp for US foreign policy
ambitions. At a more local level, those who believe that USAID fund certain
NGOs in Cambodia for purely humanitarian reasons are to say the least somewhat
naive. Ironically, when it comes to being bound by UN Treaties or the
International Criminal Court, exceptions rather than acceptance seem to be the
rule for the US.
The age 18, as mentioned in the UN convention on the
Rights of the Child, is nothing more than a reflection of American influence,
since 18 is the age of consent in most American states.
In signing a convention a country promises to aim towards
fulfilling those ideals listed in a convention; ratification is a legal step
whereby a country has passed a relevant domestic law with penalties so that the
set of ideals can be enforced. Charging or convicting any person with violating
any UN convention lacks legal grounds as UN conventions are not penal laws with
penalties. Persons can only be prosecuted for contravening a relevant domestic
law with penalties applicable to that convention.
Although the UN inserted into the 1993 Cambodian
constitution Articles 31 and 48 which obliges Cambodia to 'recognise and
respect' UN conventions relating to human rights, women and children, it was
during the UNTAC period that many women and children were consistently abused
and raped by UN personnel who enjoyed impunity sanctioned by the head of
mission who said 'boys will be boys'. Like its mentor the US, rules, laws and
conventions made for other people do not always apply to the UN.
The Cambodian constitution is similar to a UN convention -
simply a set of rules, and thus no one can be prosecuted for violating an
article in the constitution unless a penal law has been made in the National
Assembly that specifies that such a violation is a crime, and such a crime has
specific penalties.
Interestingly, UN agencies frequently ignore the details
of their own UN conventions; it tells us a lot about how agency staff really
define a child. UNICEF regards a 'child as under 15' and 'an adult female is 15
years and above' (UNICEF in Cambodia 1992 booklet). Most International Labour
Organisation conventions refer to children under 15; indeed ILO recently stated
that it wants Cambodia to ratify 2 conventions requiring the minimum age of
work to be 15, although for sexual matters an ILO spokesperson argued that
sexual exploitation below 18 should be considered a crime (confirming of course
that sex with 15-18 year-olds is not presently a crime).
The UN Population Fund has performed several demographic
surveys of Cambodia and they classify a child as 0-14 years, and a young person
as 15-24 years. Likewise the WHO refers to adults as aged 15 and above in their
statistics.
Cambodian Law on Sexual Matters The UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child (1989) Part 1, Article 1 states 'for the purposes of the
present convention, a child means every human being below the age of 18, unless
under the law applicable to the child majority is attained earlier'.
There is some confusion about whether Cambodia has
ratified this convention - certainly the NGO Committee on the Rights of the
Child (made up of 23 NGOs) feel it hasn't (Cambodia Daily, Nov 18 1999) and
wants the government to do so. UNICEF, however, thinks ratification took place
on 15 October 1992.
The domestic law with penalties that is applicable, and
the only law that is currently being used in underage sexual offences, is the
Debauchery Law (1996); Article 8 specifies sex with minors under 15 is illegal
and punishable.
Although in Cambodia 'there is no legally established age
for sexual consent' (UN Report on Human Rights, August 1996, Section III A39),
the fact that the Debauchery Law, nor any other Cambodian domestic law
specifies any penalties for sex with persons age 15 and above, it can be
deduced that the de facto age of consent is 15. Prosecutions for sex with a 15
year-old are not possible under Article 42 of the UNTAC Law (1992) which refers
to minors as under 16; this is because when two laws conflict, the most recent
law prevails as stated in fact in Article 10 of the Debauchery Law.
NGOs by asking for the age of consent to be raised from 15
to 18 are of course admitting that sex with those above 15 is not illegal;
indeed the Cambodian Women's Development Association, a member of ECPAT,
produced in 1996 an Appendix: The Law of Cambodia in which the ages 15 and 16
were the only ones mentioned in the two laws.
As Cambodia has determined that at age 15 majority is
reached, then according to the above UN convention a child is a person under 15
and not 18. Cambodia is in compliance with this convention.
(N.B. majority can be attained at different ages for
different purposes, e.g. majority for sexual purposes at 15, majority for
voting at 18, and majority for being elected an MP at 25, majority for marriage
purposes, and so on).
Sex and Cambodian Culture In one study 87% of Cambodian
young men surveyed were sexually active, and as in Thailand, the first sexual
experience is often with a prostitute. As prostitution is regarded as the
world's oldest profession and thrives in every culture providing a necessary
biological function in any society, then it is not insulting to Cambodia to say
that prostitution is part of Cambodian culture. Although there are no accurate
or updated statistics, some estimate there are 15,000 female sex workers, of
whom up to 2,000 are 'underage'.
Homosexuality is tolerated and even accepted in Cambodian
society, although discretion is advised, and Cambodian homosexuals are expected
to marry. Some 10% of young Cambodian men have sex with other men, including a
few government ministers.
The King has, in reference to a foreigner involved with
boys aged 15 and above, made the point that he did not see such action as a crime.
Cambodians correctly perceive homosexuality as one part of a continuous
spectrum of sexual activity and not in any way a crime.
Such tolerance towards matters sexual is anathema to the
foreign Christian NGOs and their local subsidiaries and spokespersons; in their
fundamentalist mindset sex outside marriage, which equates as sex for pleasure,
is a sin and homosexuality is regarded as the biggest sin of all as this sexual
activity lacks any possibility of procreation, and therefore represents nothing
but hedonism.
Child abuse mostly occurs in the home, something that we
professionals have known for years, and yet NGOs, through the media, invest
heavily in the menace of the stranger - the foreigner.
Probably 90% of child sex involves Cambodian men with
Cambodian children, although I know of one anecdotal story in which a Cambodian
woman would 'borrow' boys from an NGO orphanage--an event that apparently
forced the NGO to move house. (Interestingly, in one tourist city in Vietnam
75% of known cases of sexual abuse involved foreign women.)
In Cambodia when foreigners are involved in underage sex,
the nationalities are predominantly Asian, particularly Chinese and Japanese.
The 'Western male paedophile' preying on Cambodian children is thus largely a
myth created by Western media. A more recent media creation is the 'sex
tourist' (more of a problem than the 'alcohol tourist')? Prompted by NGOs such
stories act as excuses for politicians to appear concerned and an excuse to
avoid action on the real issues.
The truth is that it is probably far more difficult to
find a politician 'appalled' and 'horrified' by poverty - the real cause of
prostitution - than it is to find one who 'will keep sex tourists out of
Cambodia'. 'Politician vows to fight poverty' doesn't make quite such a lurid
headline.
NGOs say 'sex tourism in Cambodia is increasing' without
any objective statistics to back up such a statement. It is also a misleading
statement. Since 1997 the number of tourists has increased - accordingly, so
has the number of sex tourists. However, statisticians when looking to see if a
problem has become more common, look at the incidence - in this case it would
be the percentage of all tourists that sex tourists represent. There is no
evidence that this percentage has increased.
Lists, Blacklists and yet more Lists In 1995, NGOs first
started making lists; acting then as policemen, they took it upon themselves to
'investigate' foreigners having sex with Khmers compiling one list
predominantly of homosexuals, in tandem with an impunity list of paedophiles
working for NGOs and their supporters who were to be exempt from investigation.
Five years later, we now have NGOs acting as judges making up more lists -
'blacklists'.
Ironically, Cambodia is partly in this judicial mess
because of the example NGOs set in 1995. What exactly is the moral difference
between corrupt NGOs altering statements and fabricating evidence to get an
innocent into prison, and corrupt judges altering statements and ignoring
evidence to let guilty persons out of jail? Allowing NGOs to get away with
illegal acts eventually harms us all in one way or another.
Others have already pointed out the constitutional
illegality of such blacklists, but the selective application of human rights as
proposed by certain NGOs (which is nothing new) supports the belief that these
NGOs pay lip service only to the whole idea of human rights. Human rights to
them mean imposing their views on others. If an NGO committee is to investigate
those suspiciously acquitted and released by the courts - can we assume for the
sake of human rights - that they will similarly investigate those wrongly
convicted and imprisoned by the same corrupt judicial system?
To protest about the release of two foreign paedophiles is
correct and justified - clearly the judicial system needs fixing; to use this,
though, as a pretext to launch yet another moralistic crusade and compile lists
of, lets face it, 'enemies of (the NGO) state' is wrong.
How will raising the age of consent help, except to make
the blacklist longer? Ministers who support such a raising will of course find
themselves in a very embarrassing position - on which list will the Minister
who married a 16 year-old, and the Secretary of State who had a 15 year-old
mistress be put - the 'sex criminal list', the 'sex resident list' or the
'impunity list'?
NGOs already have too much power, something the government
will eventually regret. This power includes unspoken intimidation. Several
expatriate lawyers and others agree that there is no rule of law in Cambodia
and that the NGOs are a law unto themselves - but would never go public for the
very real fear of jeopardising their jobs or income. Labelling anyone who
doesn't agree with their views on sex as a paedophile is a weapon NGOs use to
prevent contrary opinions and reasoned debate on such issues. NGOs have taken
advantage of the fact that most officials in the Ministries of Interior and
Justice have little relevant education in police and legal matters, and implant
moral opinions in the guise of erroneous legal facts.
Who advised the contents of the posters recently displayed
outside hotels that read 'sexual exploitation of children under 18 is a crime'
and 'punishment 10-20 years'? It is wrong on three counts; children are under
15, sex with young adults under 18 is not illegal, and the punishment specified
is for sex under 15.
It would appear that in their arrogance, the NGOs have
jumped the gun. There is strong suspicion also that NGOs have been advising
that homosexuality is a crime; certainly police harassment of foreign
homosexuals involved with young adults has become apparent. Discrimination on
the grounds of sexual orientation is a violation of human rights and should
hardly be promoted by NGOs particularly when homophobia is not a feature of
Cambodian society.
Throughout history Jews, homosexuals and communists have
all been legitimate targets of hate campaigns; lists were made for the gas
chamber and lists were made for the Committee on Un-American activities.
Paedophiles are currently the group Western society needs for its righteous
hate, but there is no doubt that some NGOs regard homosexuals and paedophiles
as one and the same.
There is something deeply disturbing that a religious
group preaches such bigotry and hatred bordering on the violent (witness calls
for the death penalty in Christian Philippines). In Dan Jacobson's book about
the Bible, he wrote of the Old Testament prophets: 'the conviction that one is
speaking on the side of virtue can licence an indulgence in fantasies that
virtue itself would ordinarily compel one to foreswear'.
Conclusions
=The majority view children as persons pre-pubertal and/or
below age 14. The most common age worldwide at which sexual consent can be given
is between 14 and 16. There are no logical, biological, legal or medical
reasons to have an age of consent higher; proponents of a higher age do so for
religious or moral reasons.
=The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child allows
countries to set the age of majority for sexual consent at any age, and
Cambodia has set it at 15 years of age. Sex between ages 15 and 18 is not
illegal in Cambodia.
=The majority of child abuse occurs in the home and most
paedophiles are heterosexual Cambodians abusing Cambodian children. NGOs
represent a minority Christian-based value system. The media sensationalise
stories about sex, the contents of which are inaccurate and misleading. NGOs
obsessive fixation on teenage consentual sex and the 'scapegoating' of foreigners
is a reflection of their failure to have any impact on the major problems of
poverty, child abuse in the home, forced prostitution and human trafficking.
=Furthermore, it is an admission that the former issues
rather than the latter bring in the publicity, the funding, the cudos, the
power and the fulfilment of religious mission which NGOs seek above all. By
confirming the age 15 as the age of majority for sexual purposes the Cambodian
government could at one stroke put an end to the negative images of Cambodia
portrayed in the media, and at the same time force NGOs to concentrate on the
real issues.
more..
Gilbert Mhat at Wat Phnom in Phnom Penh Cambodia.
Businessman and NGO. A long time resident of Cambodia.
(transcript of video shown below)
The commentator said:
"Catching pedophiles has become somewhat of a
business in Cambodia.
There is growing criticism that some of these groups are
overstepping their boundaries.
One such critic is this man, Gilbert Mhat, a long term
resident of Cambodia."
.....
Involved in social work, he knows all about the sex trade
and is quick to denounce some practices of some NGO's."
Gilbert Mhat said:
"There's a lot of talk about pedophiles at the
moment.
Pedophilia
It's real thing in the press..
A lot of it is made up - phony pedophiles.
Err.
Where we are today.
Well I can talk about it a bit because
everyone knows and no-one wants to talk about it.
There is no doubt the number of NGO's who only make money
when they find pedophiles.
If they don't find any they just make them up
"What is Abuse and what is Paedophilia? 'A person is considered to be abused if he or she is treated in a way that is unacceptable in a given culture at a given time'. The key word here is 'culture'. "
ReplyDeleteWho made up that definition? So it all boils down to cultural relativism?
Geez you really are clutching at straws Ricketson. It seems your blog has choked itself on bullshit. Writing about Gavin Scott now - have you bothered to call him and ask him if you can drag his name through the mud again?
ReplyDelete