Guilty of posting porn and profiting from prostitution? Part Two

Chork's sister's wedding. Chhork is one of 16 children. He is part of a huge extended family. Chhork's father, in grey striped shirt and trousers, is the Village Chief. He was not consulted by Citipointe when they removed Rosa and Chita - as required by both law and custom. He has never been consulted by the church at any time this past five years.

...following on from Part One

When Judge Poo asked me if I had any documents to prove that I had not intended to take Rosa to a foreign country I had to give Judge Poo a lesson as best I could (for I am no lawyer) in the requirement that the court prove me guilty of saying I would take Rosa to a foreign country; not that I provide documented proof that I had no such intention.

It is indicative of the state of the judiciary that Judge Poo could even ask me to provide proof of something I had no intention of doing and for which there is no evidence that I intended to do it! When I had finished my little lecture Judge Poo nodded. He could see the logic of my argument. Indeed, it seemed as though Poo was taking in all I said. He kept peering back at the document sin front of him with an increasingly puzzled look on his face. But just as I thought I was making headway I asked Poo questions relating to the legality of Citipointe taking custody of Rosa and Chita in the first place. He told me that this question was not relevant to the complaint that had been made against me but that, if I wished, I could make a complaint against Citipointe for having illegally removed Rosa and Chita. Attractive though this proposition might sound on the surface there is much wrong with it – not the least the possibility that my complaint would sit on Poos desk for the next 17 months and then provide Citipointe and GDG with the opportunity to be able to say, “We cannot return Rosa and Chita until your complaint  has been dealt with.”

Chanti, Srey K, Kevin, James and Chhork 2013

It became clear, as my conversation with Judge Poo proceeded, that the outcome of this ‘investigation’ was going to have very little to do with facts or evidence (there is none) and everything to do with the way the story was packaged for the Judge’s consideration. At every opportunity I had (or created) I told Poo that it was inappropriate that the Cambodian authorities allowed rich and powerful foreigners to come to Cambodia to steal the children of poor families; that this breaking up of families was reminiscent of what took place during the Khmer Rouge era and should not be repeated. Judge Poo nodded. He understood what I was saying without the interpreter needing to interpret.

Chhork, holding Kevin, Srey Ka, Chanti and baby Poppy

By the time our meeting drew to a close the conclusions I arrived at that seemed to fit the facts were:

Someone had paid money to someone in the court to make sure that the 30th Oct 2012 warrant would sit in a file, unexecuted, until it was needed.

Pastor Brian Mulheran’s 21^st Feb 2013 letter threatening to have me ‘forcibly removed’ was a shot across the bow that Citipointe hoped would result in my backing off, leaving the country in fear and panic. This did not work.

Someone decided not to activate the 30^th Oct 2012 warrant in Feb 2013 but to keep it on file for later use if needed.

In early Feb 2014, I started to ask questions of the Global Development Group that it did not want to answer. These questions and observations have been published in full at:

On his first day back in the office after a trip overseas, 24^th Feb, Geoff Armstrong, having conducted a ‘thorough investigation’ of Citipointe, of which, it appears, he is a member, wrote me a curt dismissive letter in which he makes reference to the warrant that was not signed by Judge Poo until two days later.

Chanti's family's one hectare rice paddy

I have drawn my own conclusions from all this by there should be some independent body who looks at these facts (along with Citipointe’s allegations about me) and investigates them thoroughly. There is no such body, unfortunately. And it the absence of such independent monitoring and assessment that renders it possible for any unscrupulous NGO to do what it likes in Cambodia. And to do it with Australian tax dollars.

And so it was that I found myself sitting with Judge Poo – a man who seemed genuinely perplexed by the documents in front of him and interested in being presented with whatever evidence I had of the case that I was arguing – namely that Citipointe church had illegally removed and detained Rosa and Chita in 2008.

Kevin, 2013

The upshot of my two hour meeting with Judge Phou Pov Sun is that I have a month to present him with all the evidence I have of Citipointe’s illegal removal. I have lots of it. It is the very same evidence that I offered to present to the Global Development Group, the very same evidence that I have offered to present to ACFID.

The Global Development Group is not at all interested in evidence of Citipointe’s breaches of Cambodian law, its breaches of the human rights of Chanti and Chhork or its breaches of the ACFID Code of Conduct. And ACFID is only interested in conducting an investigation into such breaches if it can reserve the right not to request of either Citipointe or the Global Development Group that they provide a copy of the MOU that gave Citipointe the right to remove Rosa and Chita contrary to their parents wishes.

James

This MOU is, of course, the key document when it comes to determining the legality or otherwise of Citipointe’s actions in 2008. That ACFID may decide not to refer to the MOU during any investigation that occurs raises a whole host of questions!

Srey Ka in front of the Buddhist temple at which her family worships in their village in Prey Veng

Rosa and 2008, roughly the same age that Srey Ka is now. Rosa has now experienced close to 6 years of indoctrination into Citipointe's version of Pentecostalism