September 2, 1997

" For the first time in decades, in Cambodia, judges are being retrained."

Jeffrey S. Brand

In the wake of Cambodia's coup d'etat by its Second Prime Minister Hun Sen, Congress rushed to judgment and voted to limit severely aid to this star-crossed nation. Both the House and Senate versions of the Cambodian aid bill would eliminate most assistance aimed at promoting the rule of law in Cambodia. In September, a conference committee will decide the fate of Cambodian aid and send a measure to the president for signature. In the meantime, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) "suspended" much of its $35 million aid package for Cambodia, including most aid that supports rule-of-law education.

Congress acted because it wanted to impose economic sanctions on Hun Sen for destroying Cambodia's coalition government. When it comes to rule-of-law aid, however, the sanctions argument doesn't apply. Aid that supports a totalitarian government and aid that nurtures the rule of law are critically different. Ignoring that difference in Cambodia will strengthen Hun Sen's hand and exacerbate Cambodia's problems. The conference committee still has time to avoid that fate.

"Rule of law" is not a platitude in a country in which 2 million of the country's nearly 8 million people were murdered by Pol Pot and his henchmen. In the course of the Khmer Rouge carnage, almost all of Cambodia's educated citizens were killed or forced to leave the country, and all institutions that support common decency and respect among citizens were destroyed.

The international effort since the time of the U.N.-brokered peace in 1991 has helped Cambodia to rebuild institutions capable of guiding the country by fair and consistently applied rules rather than by the arbitrary whim of the powerful and corrupt. A primary focus of this effort includes a broad-based program in rule-of-law education to ensure that sufficient human resources exist to support democratic institutions.

The beneficiaries of such aid are not political parties vying for power but ordinary Cambodians seeking an education denied them by a genocidal war. To its credit, the United States, having learned from its past debacle in Southeast Asia, has focused on just such a mission.

The University of San Francisco School of Law's (USF's) Cambodia program is a good example of rule-of-law education that targets people, not governments. For the past four years, USF has taught basic rule-of-law principles to thousands of university students and adults in Cambodia's public and private sectors. Courses have covered the Cambodia constitution, international human-rights law, family law, property law and commercial law.

Books in Khmer to breed rule-of-law literacy now exist in all these subjects; 20 Cambodians, many of whom now teach rule-of-law courses in Cambodia, have studied at USF. USF also has trained Cambodia's fledgling bar association. Other organizations - the Asia Foundation, the American Bar Association and the International Human Rights Law Group, to name a few - have engaged in similar successful activities to assist the development of an equitable system of justice in Cambodia.

As a result, for the first time in decades in Cambodia, judges are being trained, the bar is becoming an independent force, legal aid is becoming a reality and defenders appear in some criminal courts. A cadre of Cambodians now exists that is capable of supporting democratic economic development and conducting business in a complex world economy.

No one is arguing that democracy exists in Cambodia. Hun Sen's victory surely has set back the democratic process. To use that as an excuse to cut off rule-of-law educational aid, however, misses the point. Without such aid, any move toward a more democratic government will be impossible because of the absence of a supporting infrastructure. Rule-of-law education is essential regardless of the nature of the current government. If a transition to democracy is ever to succeed, it only will occur when and educated populace is capable of supporting it.

So why is rule-of-law aid in jeopardy?

Cambodians who have benefited from such education are clamoring for more, not less, rule-of-law education and training. Denying rule-of-law aid to Cambodia won't pressure Hun Sen to move in a democratic direction. It will do nothing of the sort.

The Asian Wall Street Journal correctly reported that "much of this [recently suspended] aid isn't of the kind that Hun Sen, a leader known for his bare-knuckled politics, would necessarily miss [because] it underwrites 'programs aimed at strengthening democracy and the rule of law and respect for human rights' [quoting State Department spokesperson Nicholas Burns]."

Nor is rule-of-law education in jeopardy because of Hun Sen himself, who has given no indication to this point that he would terminate such programs. No, rule-of-law aid is in jeopardy because Congress so far has failed to understand the complexity of the aid issue.

In a generation past, U.S. policy in Southeast Asia deteriorated into an irreversible disaster. This sorry history need not be repeated in Cambodia. USAID can lift its suspension of rule-of-law programming immediately, and Congress can exempt rule-of-law programs from any aid limits it might impose.

What an irony it would be if the United States, rather than Hun Sen, stopped human-rights education in Cambodia. Come to think of it, what a tragedy.

__________________________________

The writer is a law professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law and director of its Cambodia Law and Democracy Program.