ECCC, Case 001, Issue 11

This week’s proceedings centred on hearing the testimony of 4 witnesses who purport to be former detainees at S-21. Kept alive because of their skills, Vann Nath, Chum Mei and Bo Meng testified to their painful experiences during the reign of the Khmer Rouge. When presented with an opportunity to respond to their testimonies, Duch unambiguously accepted that these three witnesses had suffered at the hands of the security office which he presided over. The fourth witness - Nong Chan Phal – alleged that he was a former child detainee at S-21, who had accompanied his mother upon her arrest. Significantly, Duch expressed reservations about the accuracy of this allegation, citing the lack of documentary evidence to prove that his mother had even been detained there.

Evidence elicited this week seemed to underscore the fact that detainees at S-21 were regarded as sub-human. Consequently, they were forced to endure excruciating conditions, which encompassed food deprivation, unsanitary living conditions, restriction of movement and habitual verbal abuse. Witnesses appeared to agree that Duch had never tortured any detainee in their presence.  Alongside this testimony, a procedural issue regarding admissibility was briefly addressed this week. The Chamber revisited the extent to which a piece of contested video footage, as well as interviews obtained from non-governmental organizations, should be able to be considered as evidence during trial. The Chamber’s treatment of the witnesses, three of whom had been victims of severe torture, was a key concern during this week’s proceedings. Furthermore, there appears to be a tension between ensuring that proceedings run in an expeditious manner, and the need to ensure that survivors are afforded sufficient time to cope with the emotions invoked by the recollection of painful experiences.