The National Assembly's Jan 2 approval of a law authorizing the formation of a special tribunal to hold accountable the architects of the murderous Pol Pot regime is a landmark that if implemented with goodwill and integrity by both the UN and the Cambodian government could chart new frontiers for international law and justice.

Potentially it could also have a profound effect on Cambodian society by taking the first step to ending its culture of impunity and exorcising the ghosts of the past. However this legislative landmark, which finally addresses the tragedy that has haunted Cambodia since 1979, does not satisfy some human rights organizations. But according to analysts, the draft law unanimously passed by the National Assembly does not seriously alter the main substance of the prior agreement with the UN.

Critics of the joint UN-RGC MOU which has underpinned the KR trial draft law have homed-in on weaknesses of the Cambodian judiciary. But after such a tortured process of negotiations and often acrimonious ping-pong between the UN and Phnom Penh, some shortcomings are the product of mutual suspicion and

acceptable compromise.

Undeniably, the credibility of the tribunal will hinge on Hun Sen's capacity to allow the tribunal to make decisions he disagrees with and its resistance to the political manipulation that plagues Cambodian courts. It also remains to be seen whether the checks and balances agreed by the UN and the Royal Government will be sufficient to guarantee judicial independence. However, any judgment about the legal flaws of the law and its compatibility with international legal standards must also take into account how the international community for so long denied the very justice to Cambodia, that it now seeks so belatedly to redress. After 1979, when the enormity of the crimes committed became apparent to the world, NATO governments led by Washington ignored Pol Pot's crimes and in application of cold war logic at its most perverse embraced the genocidal Khmer Rouge as de facto allies in a vengeance-war against Vietnam and the new government in Phnom Penh.

Although the issue of accountability for the Cambodian genocide was raised by international NGOs, the Cambodian government and Cambodian survivors in exile, their appeals for justice fell on deaf ears from 1979-1997. The international community and even the UN Human Rights Commission made no effort

to bring to justice the architects of the "killing fields" because it was not politically convenient to allow human rights to interfere with cold war vendettas.

While Cambodia's claim to a tribunal was frozen in time, more recent genocides in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia leapfrogged into the picture in the nineties. Thomas Hammarburg, the UN's Special Rapporteur on human rights for Cambodia, was the first UN official who did something about this miserable record on the KR. Through his efforts the UN General Assembly in 1997 belatedly recognized that crimes against humanity had taken place in Cambodia.

When the negotiations for the tribunal between the UN and the RGC began, both sides had reasons to distrust each other, with the Cambodian judiciary's record for corruption and political partiality balancing the UN's shameful seating of the Pol Pot regime in the UN General Assembly.

That Cambodia has finally passed a credible law -committing the government to cooperate with the UN is something to celebrate, even if the timing and nature of the tribunal are still uncertain.

An International Tribunal for Cambodia the preferred option for many - was rejected by China long before Prime Minister Hun Sen articulated complaints over loss

of sovereignty. So the "Mixed Tribunal" a Cambodian trial with international character and standards - is in reality the only option. In this untried formula an opportunity exists to develop a viable alternative to the often unwieldy international tribunals that have come before. While the "Cambodian Model" of the "mixed tribunal" (which has now been adopted by Sierra Leone) has many ambiguities, we also have to recognize that international humanitarian law is still evolving.The principle of international justice and the implementation of human rights is advanced by each new tribunal.

When the king signs the Cambodian trial law, a new paradigm will arise in which all governments that have been pressuring Cambodia not to have a tribunal will have to put up or shut-up.

Once the law is passed, any country that attempts to impede the tribunal will be guilty of failing to respect the sovereign will of the Cambodian parliament, and interfering in the internal affairs of Cambodia.

The UN and NGOs should watch closely to see which nations are supportive of the KR law passed by all three parties, and ensure that those nations that profess "noninterference in internal affairs" really practice what they preach.

Courtesy: Phnom Penh Post