Mixed Courts : The Cambodian Case : the UN Involvement and the Prospects for a Fair Trial in Cambodia

Abstract

The topic of this thesis is the forthcoming trial against the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. In March 2003 the UN and the Cambodian government reached an agreement on the establishment of a mixed court to try the former Khmer Rouge leaders. The agreement was a result of lengthy negotiations, where the balance between the international and domestic components of the court was at the core of the dispute. The UN has argued that the Cambodian judiciary is unable to handle a trial of this magnitude, while the Cambodian government has claimed its right as a sovereign country to conduct trials domestically.

With the dilemma of national versus international mechanisms of justice as a background, this thesis asks how the UN involvement has affected the prospects for a fair trial in Cambodia. This question is addressed by first, discussing whether UN involvement is a precondition for a fair trial, second, by asking if the UN prejudiced international standards of justice in its agreement with Cambodia, third, by discussing why the UN accepted a less than perfect agreement, and finally by addressing the outcome of the negotiations theoretically.

While it is evident that UN involvement is indeed a precondition for a fair trial in Cambodia, it is less clear whether the UN involvement will guarantee for international standards of justice. The agreement provides for a Cambodian majority in the court, which leads to the possibility of political influence over the trial. This thesis has found that the UN accepted this agreement basically because of pressure from influential countries such as the USA, Japan and France. Finally, this thesis has applied a theory positing an empirical relation between international norms and domestic change, and argued that the agreement on the Khmer Rouge trial can be meaningfully interpreted as a step in a process towards improved human rights policies.