Lawyers defending the Labor Rights Supported Union of Khmer Employees of NagaWorld (LRSU) president Chhim Sithar and eight other union members appealed to the Supreme Court to drop their charges on the basis that the lower court’s ruling was “inconsistent with the law” and “unreasonable”.
Five judges in the trial chamber heard the case, with one prosecutor, and six defense lawyers representing the union members. Chhim Sithar, wearing an orange prison outfit, was seen sitting on a chair flanked by two policemen. The vice president and members of the LRSU union were also present at the hearing.
Sithar received the 2024 Per Anger Award on April 19 in recognition of her dedication to promoting democracy and protecting human rights in Cambodia, despite serving a jail term. It is her second international award after receiving the Human Rights Defender Award by the US government last year.
During the hearing, prosecutor Pen Sarath asked the Advisory Council Judges to uphold the Court of Appeal’s verdict on Chhim Sithar and her colleagues while the six defense lawyers asked the apex court to drop the charges and release Sithar and the others.
One of the six defense lawyers, Sam Chamroeun, explained that the Phnom Penh Municipal Court’s verdict, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal, was “incomplete” on three points – vague analysis and clarification, and there was no justification.
Chamroeun said judicial police officers raided the union office and confiscated computers and telephones and found that LRSU had convened a meeting via Zoom, while accusing his client of using provocative language to cause social unrest.
In actuality, the Zoom meeting was conducted with union members to find a solution to their labor dispute, and it was not open to the public, he said.
“How accurate is the basis of the main facts because [the judicial police] went to copy [the meeting] on the computer when they checked the union office. According to Article 494 [of the Criminal Code], all acts of incitement are classified as factual activities in connection with public places, but we do not see the actions [of LRSU] as [a public] incitement,” said Chamroeun.
He added that the decision by the lower court to charge his client was based on incomplete evidence, noting that there was no factual finding to prove that there was incitement in public. “The court just assumed [the issue] and decided unreasonably.”
“I ask the court to consider some points to get rid of the charges, because the lower court was only assuming while the strike activities were in accordance with the labor law and it was genuine,” said Chamroeun.
He asserted that the strike was a means to resolve labor disputes, not an incitement to commit a crime.
Another defense lawyer, Sam Sokunthea, said the court should verify the legal system in accordance with the legal procedures, including the Constitution, and Labor Law.
She said the union’s source of funding was legitimate. It also covered strikers who gave birth during Covid-19, noting that the union had sought for funds from the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training.
Dy Sochetra, a lawyer with the defense team, said the lower court’s decision was distorted because their client’s protest was a collective labor dispute and not a criminal offense.
“My client was fired by the company because she was discriminated against by the company. She is the leader and the rest of them are union members. The negotiations were not successful because the company did not accept their solution,” Sochetra said.
Following the defense lawyers’ submission, Chhim Sithar and the other union members, who were asked by the judge if they agreed with their presentation in court, said they did.
The verdict will be given on May 3.
Last year, Phnom Penh Municipal Court sentenced LRSU president Chhim Sithar to two years in prison after being charged for incitement and social unrest for leading a strike, which has been ongoing since December 18, 2021.
Sithar was re-arrested in November and detained for allegedly violating the terms of her bail. She was held for eight months prior to her sentencing, which will count as time served.
Chhim Sokhorn, vice president of LRSU and one of the defendants, told CamboJA that the decision by the municipal court and Court of Appeal was unfair. She said the intention for the strike was to find a solution from NagaWorld and the ministry.
The strike was in accordance with the labor law, where their right is enshrined in the constitution but the court charged them under the criminal law.
“We don’t accept the charges, the court manipulated the truth. The fact is that our strike is allowed under the labor law, but the court charged us with criminal incitement. We don’t accept what the municipal court and the appellate court have said.”
Sokhon mentioned that there is no evidence to prove that their team incited anyone. She did not order anyone to incite or create chaos in the society. They met via Zoom with their members for union work only, she added.
“The meeting via Zoom was to find the solution with our members whether to strike or to sue in court. Our members chose to strike,” she said, while hoping that the Supreme Court will render justice to LRSU according to the law.
Am Sam Ath, operations director of LICADHO, said he has seen labor disputes in NagaWorld for a long time. The issues should be resolved through labor disputes without criminal prosecution, otherwise there would be no end to the disputes.
“This case will never end, we have seen it for years, it is still not ending,” he said. “If the labor dispute is not resolved, this case will also not end. To be charged with a criminal case because of a peaceful strike in line with the labor law, is not right,” Sam Ath said.
Kata Orn, ministry spokesperson, said only 80 former NagaWorld employees’ labor disputes remain unresolved.
The ministry has carried out its duties and responsibilities in accordance with the dispute resolution procedure, Orn confirmed, adding that the case is out of their jurisdiction now. The Arbitration Council is also not involved in it.
“As a solution, the parties must use the judicial mechanism to resolve this case,” Orn said.
