War crimes defendant Nuon Chea on Tuesday delivered a lengthy statement to the Khmer Rouge tribunal in which he insisted that the brutal evacuation of Phnom Penh and other cities in 1975 was not forced, and that all the documentary evidence used against him in court greatly exaggerated his role in the regime.
Sitting on the edge of his bed in the holding cell beneath the court, the bespectacled 87-year-old questioned the use of the Revolutionary Flag magazine, the official publication of Pol Pot’s Democratic Kampuchea, and books authored by foreigners as evidence of his role in the regime.
“I understood enough to believe that what was raised by prosecutors appeared to be neither accurate nor corresponding to the actual events that had happened during that period,” Nuon Chea said in prepared remarks that lasted 30 minutes.
He said he was speaking in order to “enlighten” the court and “contest the entirety of the content and form of the documents presented by the prosecutors.”
Nuon Chea told the court that the evacuation of Phnom Penh and other cities came on the back of nationwide food shortages and fears that U.S. aircraft would indiscriminately bomb the country again as it had done under the Lon Nol military government.
“The destruction caused by the bombings was of mind-boggling scale, when properties, homes, pagodas and cattle were hit and several thousands of innocent lives killed,” Nuon Chea told the court. “Noting this unfortunate tragedy which would most likely happen again and to ensure safety and security for the people, the leadership of Democratic Kampuchea, and Pol Pot in particular, decided to evacuate people from the cities.”
He claimed that the evacuation was “done on a voluntary basis without any coercive measures, violence or killing of the people.”
In contrast to Nuon Chea’s remarks, witnesses to the events of 1975 have described to the court time and again being forced out of the city by wild-eyed gun-toting Khmer Rouge soldiers, some of whom shot and killed those who resisted. Hospitals were also emptied of the sick and dying.
In May, Nuon Chea himself made a surprise, and uncharacteristic, expression of remorse and acknowledged moral responsibility for what happened during the regime. “I am responsible for what happened during the period of Democratic Kampuchea. I am not evading my responsibility. I am bearing the responsibility from my heart. I am being frank with you. In my capacity as a member of Democratic Kampuchea I accept the responsibility,” Nuon Chea told the court at the time.
On Tuesday, however, Nuon Chea seemed to have had a change of heart, taking prosecutors to task for presenting copies of the regime’s Revolutionary Flag magazine as documentary evidence of his role in the regime, stating plainly that the messages contained therein came primarily from Pol Pot.
“Factually, Revolutionary Flag had nothing to do with me,” Nuon Chea said.
“It was Pol Pot alone who made the decisions before any articles could be published. All in all, the decision was not collective, but made by Pol Pot,” who had “absolute power—whatever he said, he meant business.”
He went on to say that he would contest the inclusion of citations from books authored by the likes of Philip Short, David Chandler and Francois Ponchaud.
“Factually, these books, although there are pieces of documents inside, they are not 100 percent true,” Nuon Chea said.
To that end, he sought to clarify that he never held the position of acting prime minister in Pol Pot’s absence, and told the Trial Chamber that his remarks were “important for the purpose of obtaining truth and justice.”
Nuon Chea’s willingness to continue his verbal engagement with the court is now at great odds with his co-defendant Khieu Samphan, who on Tuesday told judges that he would be silent for the remainder of his trial.
“I would like to inform you that I have reasons that I have decided to exercise the right to remain silent,” he said in court.
“The reasons are because the court has failed to respect my rights and the rights of my defense counsels. At the beginning I had faith in this court, but after that, until the last moment, I have no faith in this court,” Khieu Samphan said without elaborating.
Senior Assistant Prosecutor Tarik Abdulhak said he was “stunned” by Khieu Samphan’s decision because the defendant had always previously stated his intention to answer questions.
He also noted that Khieu Samphan’s silence could work against him when the judges deliberate the case.
Stephen Heder, a former consultant for the Office of the Co-Investigating Judges and noted Khmer Rouge history scholar, also took the stand Tuesday.
Mr. Heder, who in May declined to be called as an expert witness, resigned from the court in 2011, citing a “toxic atmosphere.”
His testimony continues today.
