Op-Ed: Public Attention and Judicial Inconsistency in Violence Against Women

Design with Microsoft

Over the past few years, Cambodia has witnessed several high-profile cases of abuse against women that have captured viral levels of public and official attention. These moments of intense focus raise hopes for significant progress toward gender equity.

However, once the public’s gaze shifts and the fervor dies down, so too does the momentum for change.

This asks the question: does this fleeting spotlight truly pave the way for lasting progress toward gender equity?

Fleeting Attention and the Quest for Justice

There’s a frustrating pattern in mainstream gender discourse where public and official interest in gender equity swings dramatically—from intense outrage to complete indifference.

This inconsistency makes it incredibly difficult to achieve sustainable progress. The outcry surrounding these cases often leads to temporary action, but once the spotlight fades, the systemic issues remain unresolved, and the perpetrators frequently escape with minimal or no punishment.

Take, for example, the cases of Heng Sier, Duong Chhay, and Sok Bun.

Each of these cases drew significant public and media attention, sparking widespread outrage and calls for justice. Yet, when the public's attention fades, so too does the interest of officials, leaving the judicial system unaccountable, opaque, and lacking independence in handling violence against women.

In Yubi's case, while the court dropped the theft charge against Meas Pich Rita, there's been no word on whether Sier will face prosecution for the attempted rape allegation. This lack of follow-up is not just disappointing; it is indicative of a broader issue within the Cambodian judicial system where high-profile cases are often swept under the rug once the immediate public pressure subsides.

As for Chhay, he was stripped of his oknha title but evaded police questioning after briefly becoming a monk. This maneuver not only allowed him to avoid scrutiny but also highlighted the gaps within the system that enable powerful individuals to escape justice. To this day, the status of his investigation remains unknown, even to relevant authorities like National Police spokesperson Chhay Kim Khoeun and Justice Ministry secretary of state Kim Santepheap, who admitted they were “unaware of the case status because it was with the courts.”

Sok Bun was sentenced to three years in prison, yet all but 10 months of his sentence were suspended. This leniency sends a troubling message about the seriousness with which the Cambodian judicial system treats violence against women. It suggests that public outcry can provoke a response, but without sustained pressure, the system reverts to its usual leniency.

Final Thoughts:

Our judicial system often seems to act only when commanded to do so. Recognizing this trend, Sok Touch, head of Cambodia’s Royal Academy, aptly described our judicial apparatus as

“a remote-controlled court.”

This analogy underscores the lack of genuine autonomy and accountability within the system. Once public attention wanes, this remote-controlled court leaves perpetrators unpunished or with inadequate sentences.

This pattern reveals a critical flaw in how gender equity issues are addressed in Cambodia. The reliance on public outrage to drive judicial action is neither sustainable nor just. It places the burden on the public to constantly monitor and pressure the system, rather than ensuring that the system itself is capable of upholding justice independently.

We need to ask ourselves: How can we create a consistent, unwavering demand for justice and accountability that doesn’t fade with the news cycle? Only then can we hope to see true progress toward gender equity in Cambodia.