Experts Praise Thai Team's Performance At Preah Vihear Hearing

[webfact]

WORLD COURT
Govt downplays ICJ query
Supalak Ganjanakhundee,
Pakorn Puengnetr,
Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
The Hague


Foreign Minister Surapong Towichukchaikul and Defence Minister Sukampol Suwannathat talk with Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf of the International Court of Justice after Wednesday

Experts praise Thai team's performance at Preah Vihear hearing

THE HAGUE: -- The question raised by Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf after Wednesday's International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearing on the "vicinity" of Preah Vihear Temple reflected a personal interest of the judge, but sent no significant signals regarding the case, Foreign Minister Surapong Towichukchaikul said.

The judge asked Thailand and Cambodia to define the vicinity of Preah Vihear on maps or graphics of the area and show it to the court.

The court required a reply in written form from both sides by April 26, and the parties would have to submit responses to each other's definitions by May 3.

Some observers said the judge's question sent a signal that the court was willing to address the issue of the status of the temple's vicinity, and showed an inclination to accept the case for interpretation as requested by Cambodia.

Surapong said he asked Judge Yusuf in person during a reception party after the hearing on Wednesday about the significance and implications of the question.

The question reflected the personal interest of Judge Yusuf, not of the court's panel, but the judge would circulate the replies from both sides to the other 16 members of the court, Surapong said.

Thai agent Virachai Plasai said it was unusual for a judge to raise a question after a hearing session had ended, and to request answers in written form. Previously, the court or judges would ask questions during the hearing session and demand an immediate answer. "But we should not panic over the judge's question. It implies nothing for the whole case," Virachai told reporters.

Thailand and Cambodia are in conflict over their interpretation of the 1962 judgement by the ICJ that Preah Vihear Temple is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia. Under the judgement, Thailand was ordered to withdraw troops from the temple and its vicinity.

Cambodia has asked the court to clarify that the vicinity of the temple should be delimited by the boundary line that appears on the 1:200,000-scale map known as Annex I. Thailand argues it left the "vicinity" of the temple 50 years ago as ordered, and that the area whose status Cambodia wants the court to interpret is not same as that referred to in its previous judgement.

Political scientist Panitan Wattanayagorn said that from a legal standpoint, Thailand was at an advantage after questions were raised over the accuracy of documents put forward by Cambodia, as well as in jurisdictional issues, which he said clearly favour Thailand. "But the [iCJ] does not rely solely on testimony and documentary evidence in making its rulings. It also uses outside factors including international relations and other global issues in reaching conclusions and verdicts," he added.

He said the court has three main options: to rule that it has no jurisdiction, which would fully benefit Thailand; to endorses Cambodia's claims based on its questionable maps, which would be the worst outcome for Thailand and result in immediate loss of territory, and possibly subsequent border clashes; or to make no ruling affecting territory or the border, while issuing certain instructions for both sides to follow in order to end the issue peacefully.

Panitan, a Chulalongkorn University lecturer, pointed out an important event at the trial on Wednesday, in which a judge sought verification of Preah Vihear Temple's precise location, asking for both sides' accounts. "Many deem this a crucial point in the whole trial, signalling that the court intends to reach a conclusion."

The first option would mean that Cambodia's use of the 1:200,000-scale map would no longer be valid. But it would also result in a prolonged stalemate in which both countries are barred from entering the temple compound and the 4.5 square kilometres of land around it, and that further development of the temple as a World Heritage site would be put on indefinite hold, Panitan said. "This option will result in [the preservation of] the current situation and possibly future border clashes."

The most likely option is the third, in which the ICJ issues a ruling aimed at a peaceful resolution giving both sides a middle ground - this is the role of the ICJ in modern times, according to Panitan. But Thailand still has issues with the matter.

Panat Tasneeyanond, a former dean of Thammasat University's Law Faculty, said, "I think Thailand holds an edge [over Cambodia] in terms of the forcefulness of its statements and replies." He said it was a close fight and Thailand did well in presenting its version of the map of the area.

Weeraphat Priyawong, an independent international lawyer who has experience at ICJ trials, said Thailand's handling of the temple issue was better than Cambodia's, covered and presented more details, and was more complete.

"The Thai team used scientific evidence and solid geological proof that showed ... the 1:200,000 map [used by Cambodia] would be hugely inaccurate," he said.


-- The Nation 2013-04-19

[Thai at Heart]

Classic one sided analysis.

[bigbamboo]

This is like listening to a Thai boxing commentary. Round after round Thais being told how well their man is doing only to refuse to accept the judges ' based' decision when he loses.

[DeepInTheForest]

For what it's worth, in my dictionary, "judgment" has only one 'e'.

[noitom]

This is like listening to a Thai boxing commentary. Round after round Thais being told how well their man is doing only to refuse to accept the judges ' based' decision when he loses.

[Locationthailand]

For what it's worth, in my dictionary, "judgment" has only one 'e'.

Only if you have been uneducated by Microsoft in "lazy (American) English", dropping many letters such as double l's, u etc. Microsoft through Windows and Office has been totally responsible for the misspelling of the English language globally. A tragedy in my opinion.

[rijb]

Text messages and Twitter must really make you cry.

[noitom]

"The experts." - Those Thais, they sure are experts.

[rijb]

Is that your expert opinion?

[DLock]

For what it's worth, in my dictionary, "judgment" has only one 'e'.

Only if you have been uneducated by Microsoft in "lazy (American) English", dropping many letters such as double l's, u etc. Microsoft through Windows and Office has been totally responsible for the misspelling of the English language globally. A tragedy in my opinion.

Here's a handy tip.

You can change the Dictionary in Microsoft products to that of other countries and avoid the tragedy.

[rijb]

For what it's worth, in my dictionary, "judgment" has only one 'e'.

Only if you have been uneducated by Microsoft in "lazy (American) English", dropping many letters such as double l's, u etc. Microsoft through Windows and Office has been totally responsible for the misspelling of the English language globally. A tragedy in my opinion.

Here's a handy tip.

You can change the Dictionary in Microsoft products to that of other countries and avoid the tragedy.

But, then there would be nothing to whine about.

[webfact]

Thailand prepared for final statement on Phra Viharn case
By English News



THE HAGUE, April 19 -- Thailand is ready to present its final statement on the Phra Viharn (Preah Vihear) case at the Internatioanal Court of Justice (ICJ), to counter arguments made by Cambodia in its final oral statement on Thursday.

Thailand's ambassador to the Hague and Thailand’s agent Virachai Plasai said that the Thai legal team is confident that in the second and final round of oral statement, Thailand could counter all arguments made by Cambodia.

He believed that the oral arguments today can comprehensively and convincingly rebut Cambodia’s pleadings on Thursday.

Thailand is scheduled to make its oral statement today, Mr Virachai said, emphasising that there was nothing to be worried about. Five members of the Thai legal team will testify today, and he himself will make the last closing statement.

Mr Virachai said that during Cambodia's second day of hearings on Thursday, Cambodia was trying to convince the Court that Thailand’s implementation of the Judgment was based on its unilateral understanding of the judgment, in particular erecting a barbed-wire fence, following the line set out in the Thai Cabinet Resolution of 10 July 1962, which Cambodia found unacceptable.

Cambodia denied that it falsified the map as alleged by the Thai legal team but said it was Thailand which attempted to limit the Cambodian territory by setting up their own border line without approval by Phnom Penh.

"We did not falsify the map as claimed by Thailand. But in fact, Thailand has attempted to limit our vicinity by setting up a fence without our approval," said Cambodia's lawyer Rodman Bundy.

As for the request by Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, a member of the Court, who asked both Thailand and Cambodia to indicate the precise territorial extent that each of the Parties considers to be the “vicinity” of the Temple, Mr Virachai said that Judge Yusuf’s question to the Parties was not on behalf of the Court.

He noted that it was quite common in international dispute settlement bodies for judges to request additional information from the parties. While waiting for the question to be submitted in writing through the Court’s Registrar, the legal team would consult to prepare Thailand’s response. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2013-04-19

[Payboy]

I wonder if it's possible to bring the judges to Thailand for ummm...errr.... familiarization trip. Check out the hills and valleys sort of.

[clockman]

As long as they have somebody to blame!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DeepInTheForest]

For what it's worth, in my dictionary, "judgment" has only one 'e'.

Only if you have been uneducated by Microsoft in "lazy (American) English", dropping many letters such as double l's, u etc. Microsoft through Windows and Office has been totally responsible for the misspelling of the English language globally. A tragedy in my opinion.

I agree with you in many cases with regards to Microsoft's goofy spellings, but in this one, it's been "judgment" for as long as I can remember. Similar to "acknowledgment". Anyway, it's a somewhat trivial matter. (I wonder how English will change, if we could look, say, 200 years into the future.) And that's enough of this digression for me.

Edited April 19, 2013 by DeepInTheForest

[Pimay1]

Expert: Someone from out of town with a briefcase.

[webfact]

PREAH VIHEAR CONTROVERSY
ICJ judge asks Thailand, Cambodia to define 'vicinity'
Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation, The Hague



THE HAGUE: -- The question raised by Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf after the hearing session on the 'vicinity' of the Preah Vihear was of personal interest to the judge but sent no significant signal about the case, Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul said.

The judge asked Thailand and Cambodia to define the vicinity of Preah Vihear on maps or graphics of the area and show it to the court.

The court required a reply in written form from both sides by April 26, and the parties would have to submit responses to each other's definitions by May 3.

Some observers said the judge's question sent a signal that the court was willing to address the issue of the status of the temple's vicinity, and showed an inclination to accept the case for interpretation as requested by Cambodia.

Surapong said he asked Judge Yusuf in person during a reception party after the hearing on Wednesday about the significance and implications of the question.

The question reflected the personal interest of Judge Yusuf, not of the court's panel, but the judge would circulate the replies from both sides to the other 16 members of the court, Surapong said.

Thai envoy Virachai Plasai said it was unusual for a judge to raise a question after a hearing session had ended, and to request answers in written form. Previously, the court or judges would ask questions during the hearing session and demand an immediate answer.

"But we should not panic over the judge's question. It implies nothing for the whole case," Virachai told reporters.

Thailand and Cambodia are in conflict over the interpretation of the 1962 judgement the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which rules the Preah Vihear temple is situated in territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia and orders Thailand to withdraw troops from the temple and its vicinity.

Cambodia asked the court to make clear that the vicinity of the temple should go along with the boundary line appeared in the Annex I map of 1:200,000 scale. hailand argues it left the "vicin¬ity" of the temple 50 years ago as ordered, and that the area whose status Cambodia wants the court to interpret is not same as that referred to in its previous judgement.


-- The Nation 2013-04-19

[GuestHouse]

What will Thailand's politicos do if the dispute is ever settled?

The running sore of Thailand's injured natioal pride is a sure fire emotion switch to be turned on whenever the nation's masses need to be inflamed and have their attention distracted from 'other matters'.

[Khun Watchaporn]

Thailand prepared for final statement on Phra Viharn case

Dummies have been placed in mouth, ready to be spat out at a moment's notice.

[DeepInTheForest]

What will Thailand's politicos do if the dispute is ever settled?

The running sore of Thailand's injured natioal pride is a sure fire emotion switch to be turned on whenever the nation's masses need to be inflamed and have their attention distracted from 'other matters'.

It is remarkable that both countries are arguing their case at the ICJ. That implies that they both will be somewhat bound to acknowledge the court's judgment. This is pretty remarkable in today's world; one has to applaud negotiation as a solution to conflict. I think this is because both countries have much to gain by resolution of the dispute. There is a lot of tourist money to be collected by both sides if the waters can be calmed.

Of course aggrieved parties can always reopen the dispute. But the ruling should establish some kind of precedent, and I think the ICJ will be careful to provide a reasoned judgment. They too, are invested in its outcome-- the prestige of the ICJ is at stake, and a ruling accepted by both sides would cause the ICJ's stock to rise.

Edited April 19, 2013 by DeepInTheForest

[rubl]

"a personal interest of the judge" ?

Does this mean the blame game has started in earnest?

[Locationthailand]

For what it's worth, in my dictionary, "judgment" has only one 'e'.

Only if you have been uneducated by Microsoft in "lazy (American) English", dropping many letters such as double l's, u etc. Microsoft through Windows and Office has been totally responsible for the misspelling of the English language globally. A tragedy in my opinion.

Here's a handy tip.

You can change the Dictionary in Microsoft products to that of other countries and avoid the tragedy.

I can but the people who don't know better don't. The dumbing down of the people continues. Thx Bill.

[dighambara]

This is like listening to a Thai boxing commentary. Round after round Thais being told how well their man is doing only to refuse to accept the judges ' based' decision when he loses.

That the judge's decisions will be biased is know as a fact. Europeans invaded and stole territories from Siam - no one believes that a European Court could remotely remain impartial.

The French invaded Siam and took control of thousands of acres of Siamese property. The result was that Angkor and Vientiene became parts of two new and completely redefined countries; Laos and Cambodia.

Without the French, the territories now called Laos, Camboda and South Vietnam would have remained under Thai (Siamese) control.

Without the British, the territories now called Malaya, Singapore, N Burma & Yunan would have remained under Thai control.

Don't believe me, read British and French histories.

[whybother]

dighambara, on 20 Apr 2013 - 09:47, said:

bigbamboo, on 19 Apr 2013 - 08:40, said:

This is like listening to a Thai boxing commentary. Round after round Thais being told how well their man is doing only to refuse to accept the judges ' based' decision when he loses.

That the judge's decisions will be biased is know as a fact. Europeans invaded and stole territories from Siam - no one believes that a European Court could remotely remain impartial.

The French invaded Siam and took control of thousands of acres of Siamese property. The result was that Angkor and Vientiene became parts of two new and completely redefined countries; Laos and Cambodia.

Without the French, the territories now called Laos, Camboda and South Vietnam would have remained under Thai (Siamese) control.

Without the British, the territories now called Malaya, Singapore, N Burma & Yunan would have remained under Thai control.

Don't believe me, read British and French histories.

Last I checked, there is no territory "now called Malaya".

Was Singapore, the Malaysian peninsular, or South Vietnam EVER under Thai control?

[apetley]

dighambara, on 20 Apr 2013 - 09:47, said:bigbamboo, on 19 Apr 2013 - 08:40, said:

This is like listening to a Thai boxing commentary. Round after round Thais being told how well their man is doing only to refuse to accept the judges ' based' decision when he loses.That the judge's decisions will be biased is know as a fact. Europeans invaded and stole territories from Siam - no one believes that a European Court could remotely remain impartial.

The French invaded Siam and took control of thousands of acres of Siamese property. The result was that Angkor and Vientiene became parts of two new and completely redefined countries; Laos and Cambodia.

Without the French, the territories now called Laos, Camboda and South Vietnam would have remained under Thai (Siamese) control.

Without the British, the territories now called Malaya, Singapore, N Burma & Yunan would have remained under Thai control.

Don't believe me, read British and French histories.Last I checked, there is no territory "now called Malaya".

Was Singapore, the Malaysian peninsular, or South Vietnam EVER under Thai control?

Not in any of my history books.

Some may even argue that the French were only giving Cambodia back what was once theirs anyway. They could have ceded far more territory as most of Thailand was part of the Khemer Empire for many centuries.

[RubbaJohnny]

Can anyone name a Cambodia commentator impressed by the Thai evidence.

The sad and tragic irony is two alledgedly Bhuddist nations have come to blows repeatedly over aplace of worship.

The issue of a crumbling ruin less frequented than the dens of iniquiy in Bangsue will continu to be a crutch for nationalist fanatics of all sides who have no respect for the eight fold path or dharma.

Perhasp the finest outcome will be asinkhole for the ruins and ruined leaders who mask their tawdry ambitions behind the cloak of patriotism