Prosecutors, opened in November 2003. The new graduates will eventually replace the 190 judges who currently preside. Critics, however, are concerned about the selection of students: one candidate who failed the entrance exam was reportedly offered admission in exchange for US $15,000.1
New government compromised by claims of illegitimacy Following the country’s second national election in 1998, the political situation in Cambodia has been highly unstable and corruption has flourished amid intense power struggles. In the run-up to the third national election in July 2003, Cambodian civil society groups and donors widely anticipated widespread corrupt activity. The international community threatened withdrawal of donor support if the election was not declared ‘free and fair’, and the National Election Committee (NEC) promptly declared them to be so. The civil society election monitor, the Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (Comfrel), dispute this.2 Despite the three main parties signing a voluntary code of conduct for political parties (drafted by the NEC, the National Democratic Institute and the political parties themselves) in June 2003, there were reports of widespread vote buying, violence and intimidation by all contesting parties, particularly in rural areas. The ruling Cambodian Peoples’ Party (CPP) bore the brunt of most of these allegations, and election monitors and opposition parties both accused the CPP of doling out money, rice and sarongs in exchange for votes. Other parties were accused of distributing gifts to participants at their rallies in an attempt to influence results.3 Civil society played an important role up to, and during, the election by distributing voter guides, arranging public discussion forums and participating as election observers at polling stations. Their presence created a relaxed atmosphere and assured voters that the process was fair. The presence of international and national election monitors was limited.
120
The CPP, which has been in power since 1979, won without an outright majority causing a political deadlock that lasted for 11 months. A fudged, and some argue unconstitutional, agreement between the CPP and the National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia (FUNCINPEC) eventually resolved the deadlock and allowed a coalition government to be formed. Despite the questionable legitimacy of the current administration, however, there was very little criticism of the incoming government from academics, civil society groups or international observers. Instead, there was widespread agreement that the 2003 election was, at least, an improvement over that of 1998, with more open and issue-driven debates, and an overall reduction in the number of reported electoral irregularities. While the CPP’s continuing majority cannot be solely attributed to vote buying and intimidation, the voting demographics in Cambodia may keep such practices a prominent feature of the electoral landscape. The increasing loss of CPP’s powerbase in the expanding, better educated urban areas creates an incentive to make up for this shortfall in the rural areas where the majority of corrupt practices already occur. Corruption in rural areas is encouraged by two primary factors. First, in spite of the code of conduct for political parties, those buying the votes and doing the intimidating are local party leaders who were neither involved in the design of the code, nor the formulation of party election strategy. Their position reflects Cambodia’s patron– client social structure in which a small elite determine overall political direction and only their local deputies actually have contact with voters. Since many local functionaries identify passionately with their party, and enhance their stature
Country reports
GC2005 02 chap06 120
13/1/05 4:34:01 pm