Hun Xen's regime plans to ban all such street demonstration in the future (Photo: Reuters)08 May 2010
By Pen Bona
Radio France Internationale
Translated from Khmer by Kanh-chanh Chek
Click here to read the article in Khmer
The Phnom Penh city hall plans to set up a “Freedom Park” where demonstrators can gather to protest there without having to hold a march along the many public streets as what had happened in the past. The city explained that the set up of the “Freedom Park” where people can express their opinions is aimed at eliminating anarchy during protest march, as well as strengthening the security for the demonstrators (sic!). However, groups of “Freedom Lovers” who have led numerous protests do not want to see such “Freedom Park” as they consider this park a restriction on their freedom.
Soon, those who want to express their opinions through demonstrations will be restricted to meet only at a place dubbed the “Freedom Park.” This park will be set up soon based on the stipulation of the demonstration law that was ratified by the National Assembly in October 2009.
The government explained that the goal of setting this “Freedom Park” is to respect the freedom of expression for the people in a democracy, as well as to preserve social order. However, for union representatives and opposition politicians, as well as representatives of the civil society organizations, such “Freedom Park” is nothing more than a “Freedom Restriction Park”.
It is true that such park holds both positive and negative aspects to it. The positive aspect stems from the fact that it is now easy for cops to provide security for the demonstrators. Furthermore, it also cuts down on the disturbances to the public due to traffic jams generated by demonstration march. In addition, meetings at such park could lessen clashes between cops and demonstrators as well. However, the question remains as to whether such park will be set up to preserve social order, or does it hide any other motives?
Two main observations are raised by critics to such park:
However, criticisms remain just that: criticisms. The law was already ratified and the “Freedom Park” will see the daylight soon and nobody can stop it because this is what the ruling party dictates through its majority votes in the National Assembly. Therefore, from now on, any discussion on this issue is not very useful anymore. On the other hand, what is needed is for the government, from the national levels down to the grass root levels, to quickly and efficiently resolve the problems for the people, in order to avoid any demonstration to take place because it is “better to take caution than to cure the problems.” (Fix the small problem now before it becomes larger and harder to fix).
When demonstrations are taking place all the time, the government should listen to the people’s wishes. A demonstration is an opportunity for top level government leaders to receive direct information from the public so that they can dutifully take care of the matters. Furthermore, listening to the hardship of the people is after all the duty of each and every leader in the country.
As for the demonstrators, they should avoid mixing up with political issues because it would be very difficult to resolve any issues that are tainted with politics. If all parties can do as such, demonstrations will bring benefit to the general population. Otherwise, such “Freedom Park” will remain nothing more than a “Bad taste Park”.
-----
KI-Media note: Mr. Pen Bona seems to forget that a demonstration is in itself an expression of a “political” belief, therefore, it would be incongruous, if not ridiculous, for Mr. Pen Bona to call for “not mixing up politics” and demonstrations, unless of course Mr. Pen Bona is suggesting that politics should be banned from Cambodian streets.
Soon, those who want to express their opinions through demonstrations will be restricted to meet only at a place dubbed the “Freedom Park.” This park will be set up soon based on the stipulation of the demonstration law that was ratified by the National Assembly in October 2009.
The government explained that the goal of setting this “Freedom Park” is to respect the freedom of expression for the people in a democracy, as well as to preserve social order. However, for union representatives and opposition politicians, as well as representatives of the civil society organizations, such “Freedom Park” is nothing more than a “Freedom Restriction Park”.
It is true that such park holds both positive and negative aspects to it. The positive aspect stems from the fact that it is now easy for cops to provide security for the demonstrators. Furthermore, it also cuts down on the disturbances to the public due to traffic jams generated by demonstration march. In addition, meetings at such park could lessen clashes between cops and demonstrators as well. However, the question remains as to whether such park will be set up to preserve social order, or does it hide any other motives?
Two main observations are raised by critics to such park:
- The selection of the park location does not please critics because it does not provide any benefit of the demonstration meeting.
- The limitation on the maximum number of demonstrators is set to 200.
However, criticisms remain just that: criticisms. The law was already ratified and the “Freedom Park” will see the daylight soon and nobody can stop it because this is what the ruling party dictates through its majority votes in the National Assembly. Therefore, from now on, any discussion on this issue is not very useful anymore. On the other hand, what is needed is for the government, from the national levels down to the grass root levels, to quickly and efficiently resolve the problems for the people, in order to avoid any demonstration to take place because it is “better to take caution than to cure the problems.” (Fix the small problem now before it becomes larger and harder to fix).
When demonstrations are taking place all the time, the government should listen to the people’s wishes. A demonstration is an opportunity for top level government leaders to receive direct information from the public so that they can dutifully take care of the matters. Furthermore, listening to the hardship of the people is after all the duty of each and every leader in the country.
As for the demonstrators, they should avoid mixing up with political issues because it would be very difficult to resolve any issues that are tainted with politics. If all parties can do as such, demonstrations will bring benefit to the general population. Otherwise, such “Freedom Park” will remain nothing more than a “Bad taste Park”.
-----
KI-Media note: Mr. Pen Bona seems to forget that a demonstration is in itself an expression of a “political” belief, therefore, it would be incongruous, if not ridiculous, for Mr. Pen Bona to call for “not mixing up politics” and demonstrations, unless of course Mr. Pen Bona is suggesting that politics should be banned from Cambodian streets.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น