Letter to Cambodian Judge explaining why I prefer arrest to appearing for questioning this Friday

Baby Poppy,  Chanti  and her husband Chhork, have waited in Phnom Penh for 2 weeks to speak with a representative of the Global Development Group (GDG) - the Australian based NGO that delivers tax-deductible funding to Citipointe church's 'SHE Rescue Home' - the Australian based NGO that illegally removed Chanti's two eldest daughters from her care in 2008. GDG refuses to speak with the parents of Rosa and Chita or to look at any evidence in support of the illegality of Citipointe's actions

Poppy and Chanti March 2014

Poppy and Chhork, March 2014

James Ricketson

Phnom Penh

jamesricketson@gmail.com

Mr Phou Pov Sun

Investigating Judge

Phnom Penh Municipal Court

Criminal Case number 3730                                                                                      

5^th March 2014

Dear Mr Phou Pov Sun

In relation to the Court Order presented to me on 28^th Feb, I wish to make the following observations:

- I do not speak or read Khmer

- The translation I had made of the 26^th Feb Court Order did not clarify (a) the organization that had laid the charges or (b) the precise nature of the charges.

I have now received 3 different interpretations of what the court document asserts:

(1) I am being charged with being a prostitute

(2) I am being charged with posting pornography on my blog

(3) I am being charged with hindering Citipointe church in its attempt to help prostitutes.

Given that both (1) and (2) are demonstrably untrue, I will concentrate on (3), bearing in mind that I must rely on information presented to me a journalist; not by the court.

Rosa at home with her mum, Chanti, and grandmother, Vanna, six months before being 'rescued' by Citipointe church

Is Citipointe suggesting that Yem Chanty’s daughters, Rosa and Chita, were prostitutes in in 2008 when the church removed them from the care of their family? Rosa was aged six at the time; Chita aged three.

If 6 year old Rosa and 3 year old Chita were prostitutes in 2008, why were no charges brought against their parents at the time? Why has there never been, in any correspondence between myself and the church this past five years, any suggestion that Rosa and Chita were prostitutes in 2008 or at any other time?

If Rosa and Chita were not prostitutes then Citipointe’s accusation has no merit, unless the church is referring to my having hindered the ‘SHE Rescue Home’ in its attempts to help other prostitutes in its care.

Has Citipointe presented the Phnom Penh Municipal Court with any evidence in support of the proposition that that I have ‘hindered’ the church in its attempts to help these prostitutes? If so, on what dates did such ‘hindering’ occur? And in what way was I ‘hindering’?

If you, as Judge, have no evidence before you that Rosa and Chita were prostitutes in 2008,  or that I have ‘hindered’ Citipointe in its attempts to help prostitutes in the church’s care, Citipointe has engaged in vexatious litigation and should be charged with defamation.

Chanti teaching Rosa to count in English

Citipointe’s accusation is in line with a not-so-thinly veiled threat issued to me in a letter by Pastor Brian Mulheran on 21^st Feb 2013

“Using the law is the last thing that we want to see happen, because for you to be convicted of a crime and serve a sentence may mean that you will never have the opportunity to re-enter Cambodia again.”

Citipointe‘s accusation in Feb 2014 is the church’s attempt to intimidate me into ceasing my advocacy on behalf of Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork. I will not be intimidated and will quite happily go to jail if this is what is required to bring attention to the gross miscarriage of justice that has occurred as a result of Citipointe’s illegal removal of Rosa and Chita in 2008.

I have attached a copy of the ‘contract’ that Citipointe church asked Yem Chanthy to sign on 31^st July 2008.

Is this, in the opinion of the court, a legal document? Does this 31^st July 2008 document give Citipointe church the right to remove Rosa and Chita from their family and detain them in an institution for five years against the wishes of their parents?

Rosa in school before her 'rescue'

Given that Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork have repeatedly asked for their daughters to be returned to their care this past five years, on the basis of what legal document has the church been able to detain Rosa and Chita since 2008? The church claims that its legal right resides in a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Social Affairs. If this is so, natural justice demands that the parents be provided with a copy of this memorandum; that I, as their legally appointed advocate, also be provided with a copy of it. We have not been, despite having asked for copies for five years now.

Step # 1 in the 'rescue' of girls from their families to be transformed into 'victims of human trafficking' - the singalong and prayer meeting down by the river. Chita in the centre, Rosa behind her right shoulder.

If, on 11^th August 2008, Citipointe had entered into no legally binding contract with either Chanti or Chhork (the parents) or with the Ministry of Social Affairs giving the church the right to detain Rosa and Chita against the wishes of their parents, Pastor Leigh Ramsey, Ms Rebecca Brewer and Ms Helen Shields are guilty of ‘unlawful removal’ in accordance with Article 8 of Cambodia’s 2008 Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation is quite clear:

Definition of Unlawful Removal

The act of unlawful removal in this law shall mean to:

1) remove a person from his/her current place of residence to a place under the actor’s or a third person’s control by means of force, threat, deception, abuse of power, or enticement, or

2) without legal authority or any other legal justification to do so, take a minor or a person under general custody or curatorship or legal custody away from the legal custody of the parents, care taker or guardian.

Step # 2 - get the girls about to be 'rescued' , the daughters of Buddhist parents, to pray to a Christian God.

If you do not have before you clear evidence that Citipointe had a legal right to tell Chanti, Chhork and myself on 11^th August 2008 that Rosa and Chita would remain in the custody of the church until they were 18, the three above-mentioned church personnel should be charged with ‘unlawful removal’.

I will not be attending any interview with any police until such time as I am provided with (a) a copy of any and all documents relating to the possibility that Rosa and Chita, at ages 6 and 3 in 2008, were prostitutes; (b)  evidence that I have ‘hindered’ Citipoine in its efforts to help prostitutes this past five years; (c) evidence, in the form of contracts and/legally binding agreements, that Citipointe church had a legal right to remove the girls from their family in 2008 and (d) that Citipointe has had a legal right to detain the girls and refuse them regular and appropriate access to their family this past five years.

Whilst this may not, strictly speaking, be a legal question, does the Court believe that it is appropriate for expatriate NGOs to force the children of Buddihist parents to adopt the Christian faith, as happens with Citipointe church and with  many other Christian NGOs?

Step # 3 - the reward! Food parcels handed out to all the kids, though it is only the girls that Citipointe intends to 'rescue'

Why do the Cambodian government, the Cambodian courts, allow foreigners to steal Cambodian children from Cambodian families? Why are these NGOs not assisting the materially poor families of these girls rather than removing them and forcing them to become Christians? If you believe that NGOs have this right, if you believe such behaviour to be appropriate on the part of NGOs such as Citipointe’s  ‘SHE Rescue Home’ you can issue a warrant for my arrest for fighting for the right of Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork to bring up their own daughters. Or you could decide, in your deliberations and looking at the evidence, that Rosa and Chita would be better off growing up within family that loves them, within the family they love, than to be growing up within an institution in which they are forced to abandon their Buddhist religion and be indoctrinated into the Christian faith.

Food for everyone who has sat through the singalong and prayer meeting

Do you, Mr Phou Sun, wish to endorse the behavior of those NGOs in Cambodia, of which Citipointe’s ‘SHE Rescue Home’ is but one, who believe that the children of materially poor Cambodians are better off growing up in institutions run by foreigners than within their own families; in institutions run by rich Christians who wish to win souls for Jesus Christ and in the process alienate Cambodian children from their mothers and fathers, their brothers and sisters, their uncles and aunts, their extended  family, their community, their religion and the traditions of a proud Cambodian culture. 

Step # 4 - food for the parents also to soften them up for the offer about to be made to them to provide assistance to their families

This is what the Khmer Rouge set out to achieve in 1975. Citipoine church, and its paymaster, the Australian based Global Development Group, are the Khmer Rouge of 2014 – with intentions as noble but as misguided as Pol Pot’s.

“The pathway to hell is paved with good intentions.”

I can find no Khmer equivalent for this aphorism but there are two sayings of Gautama Buddha that are relevant here:

"What's done to the children is done to society."

"He who wrongs the innocent must bear the fruit of his act, like dust flung against the wind."

I await my arrest this coming weekend with a clear conscience.

best wishes

James Ricketson

Cambodia, 2008. Rosa, a few months after she was illegally removed from her family,  along with her sister, Chita, by Brisbane-based Citipointe church. Rosa is holding a silver crucifix out for the church photographer. Church staff  then gave this photo to her Buddhist parents - Chanti and Chhork. 5 years later the church retains custody of Rosa and Chita despite repeated requests from their parents that they be returned to the family. Citipointe is funded by Australian NGO, the Global Development Group

Following is the text of the letter I wrote to Judge Phou Pov Sun – his name, it seems, open to various spellings:

Investigating Judge

Pu Povsun

3^rd floor

Phnom Penh Municipal Court

4^th March 2014

Dear Pu Povsun

On 24^th Feb 2014, Mr Geoff Armstrong, Executive Director of the Global Development Group wrote a letter to me in which he informed me that I had been charged with ‘hindering’ Citipointe church.

I knew nothing about these charges at the time because your court had not charged me yet.

Four days later, on 28^th Feb,  I was provided with a document from the court, dated 26^th Feb, to let me know that I had been charged.

Whilst it was not easy to understand what I had been charged with, it eventually became apparent that the charge was ‘hindering’ Citipoine church in its attempt to ‘help prostitutes’.

I am interested to know and understand how Mr Geoff Armstrong was able to know about my being charged on 24^th Feb - two days before the court document was prepared (26^th Feb) and four days before it was delivered to me?

I am interested to know also if there is any suggestion that the ‘prostitutes’ I  have supposedly been ‘hindering’ Citipopinte church in helping, are Rosa and Chita – who were, respectively, 6 and 3 years old at the time they were removed from their family by Citipointe church in 2008.

yours sincerely

James Ricketson

...prostitution and pornography charges dropped. Accused now of 'hindering'!

It has occurred to someone that the ‘prostitution’ and ‘pornography’ charges against me are not going to stick so now I am being charged with ‘hindering’. To be specific, ‘hindering’ Citipointe church in its efforts to ‘help prostitutes’!

Two letters here – the first to Australia’s Ambassador to Cambodia and the second to Citipointe’s Pastor Brian Mulheran – who last year issued a not-so-thinly-veiled threat that have me ‘forcibly removed.’!

Ms Alison Burrow

Ambassador to Cambodia

Australian Embassy

16B, National Assembly Street

Sangkat Tonle Bassac

Lhan Chamkamon,

Phnom Penh, Cambodia                                                                                 

3^rd Feb 2014

Dear Ambassador

In the event that I am arrested later this week, I am placing the following on record:

On 28^th Feb a policeman arrived at my hotel to present me with a document prepared by the Phnom Penh court. He asked me to sign it with my thumb print. Given that I do not read Khmer I declined. When I had the document translated I found that it made little sense to me and, again, I declined to place my thumb print on it.

The following text (English translation) suggested that I was being accused of  being, in some way, involved in ‘prostitution’:

…accused Mr. Jame Ricketson, male, aged 64, Australian, 
of prostitution (the act frustrating the protection, assistance, or correction by the organization) committed in Phnom Penh in 2010 according to article 25 and 26 of the law on suppression against human trafficking and sexual exploitation. 
order Mr. Jame Ricketson, male, aged 64…to appear at Phnom Penh Municipal court at questioning room “M” 3rd floor on 07 March 2014 Time at 2:30 PM 
In order to question the case of prostitution (the act frustrating the protection, assistance, or correction by the organization). 
The above person shall bring all documents concerning with the case, if any. 
In case the above name fails to appear on the schedule, we will issue the arrest warrant

A few days later a journalist spoke with the court and was informed that no, I was not being accused of being a prostitute,  or involved in prostitution, but with posting pornography on my blog. I wrote the attached letter to Pastor Leigh Ramsey of the Brisbane-based Citipointe church seeking evidence from her that I had posted pornography on my blog.

By this morning, 3^rd March, the accusation had changed to my ‘hindering’ an unnamed organization in its attempts to help prostitutes.

It is clearly Citipointe church that has brought one of the three above-mentioned charges against me or, perhaps, all three. I don’t know and, despite my asking, in a letter, the court has not informed me. I have attached a copy, in Khmer, of the letter I wrote to the court – in both Khmer and English.

If I were to attend an interview with the police and they refused to tell me who had brought the charges against me, the exercise of being ‘interviewed’ would be a futile one. In the absence of the name of my accuser, how could the evidence that my accuser has presented to the police of my ‘hindering’ be presented to me to respond to? In the absence of evidence, what would there be to discuss?

If  the interview was to be conducted in the absence of evidence and without me being officially told that the accusations came from Citipointe, I would walk out. The police could then interpret this as my ‘hindering’ their investigation!

But let’s just say I was prepared to sit through an ‘evidence free’ interview, without knowing, officially, who has laid the charges? Given that I do not know if I am being charged with one or all three of the above charges, how can I possibly know what documents to bring along to prove my innocence?

In a proper court of law it is up to a prosecutor to present evidence of the guilt of the accused. It is not up to the accused to provide proof of his or her innocence? Cambodia seems to be an exception to this basic legal principle!

And if I turn up for this ‘interview’ without documents, will this also be viewed as evidence that I am ‘hindering’ the investigation?

In the event that I am being charged with ‘hindering’ (presuming that there is such a crime!) I could easily prove my innocence  by providing copies of all my correspondence with Citipointe this past five years – during which time I have been acting as an advocate for the parents of two girls illegally removed from their family by the church in 2008. These amount more than 150. Should I present all 150 of them to the police in English or in Khmer? To have around 150 letters translated into Khmer would be beyond my financial capacity to accomplish. And if it turns out that it is, after all, the posting of pornography I am being accused of, the expense of having the documents translated will have been wasted.

If, indeed, it is ‘hindering’ I am being accused of and not being a prostitute or posting porn, the question then arises:

How did Geoff Armstrong, Executive Director of the Global Development Group, know on 24^th Feb, two days before the document was prepared by the court, on 26^th Feb, that I was to be charged with ‘hindering’?

In the absence of any clarity about who has brought these non-specific charges against me and what the nature of the charges is, I will not attend an interview with the police. If this results in my arrest, so be it. This is far preferable to attending an ‘interview’ under the circumstances outlined above. If nothing else my arrest for ‘hindering’ an unnamed NGO  will highlight how laughably incompetent the Cambodian judiciary is and raise some questions in the media about both Citipointe and the Global Develop Group’s funding of the church. Perhaps, with me in jail, it will occur to those who should have been asking Citipointe questions this past five years, to start asking questions. The first of which should be:

On what legal basis did the church remove Rosa and Chita from their family in 2008? To be more specific, on 11^th August 2008, when Rebecca Brewer told Rosa and Chita’s parents that their daughters would stay with the church’s ‘SHE Rescue Home’ until they were 18, on what legal basis did it do so?

This is a question that you, as Australia’s Ambassador, could also ask of Citipointe – an Australian church that runs the ‘SHE Rescue Home’.

best wishes

James Ricketson

Pastor Brian Mulheran

322 Wecker Road

Carindale

QLD 4152                                                                                          

4^th March 2014

Dear Pastor Mulheran

I am writing in relation to an article that appears in this morning’s ‘Cambodia Daily’, dated 4^th March 2014. I will quote from it:

“In an email to a reporter in May, Citiponte Executive Pastor said the church was adhering to its memorandum of understanding with the government and all relevant government directives.”

Do you, Pastor Mulheran, believe that the parents of girls removed in accordance with such a memorandum of understanding have a right to be given a copy of it so that (a) they can know why their daughters were removed, (b) what their rights as parents are and (c) what they must do to get their daughters back?

Chanti, Chhork and I have been asking Citipointe church for a copy of this memorandum of understanding for five years now; for copies of any and all agreements and/or contracts Citipointe church has entered into with Cambodian authorities that give your church the rights it has exercised. What possible reason can you have for withholding these from Chanti and Chhork?

Please supply a copy of these documents, today, to Chanti and Chhork (with me in Phnom Penh) and all of those to whom I am copying this letter. If you do not, I trust that members of the media will ask you why you refuse to allow Chanti and Chhork to have copies of them. They might also ask why it is that in the past five years your church has not given $1 to help this family become self-sufficient.

My second question for you today, Pastor Mulheran, is this:

“Is Geoff Armstrong a member or parishioner of Citipointe church?”

My third question:

“Did you or Pastor Leigh Ramsey inform Geoff Armstrong on or before 24^th Feb 2014 that I was to be charged with ‘hindering’ Citipointe in its efforts to ‘help prostitutes’? If so, how did Citipointe come to be in possession of the contents of the court document two days before it was presented to me stamped with the date 26^th Feb?”

This question is particularly pertinent this week in light of my impending arrest. On 21^st Feb 2013, in a letter to me, you issued a scarcely veiled threat to have me ‘forcibly removed’ . You wrote:

“Using the law is the last thing that we want to see happen, because for you to be convicted of a crime and serve a sentence may mean that you will never have the opportunity to re-enter Cambodia again.”

It is statements such as this that give mafias of all different kinds their deserved reputation for intimidation. I will leave it to others to interpret your comments of 21^st Feb.

If Citipointe has decided to ‘arrange’ to have me arrested and convicted and banned from coming to Cambodia, surely you could have thought of a better crime than ‘hindering’! Even in Cambodia I think it would be difficult for a judge to find me guilty of ‘hindering’.

If you have ‘arranged’ to have the charge of ‘hindering’ brought against me you can also arrange for the charge to be dropped because I can assure you I will not be attending any meeting with the police later this week under the circumstances that prevail at present. If Judge Pu Povsun wishes to issue an warrant for my arrest, so be it.

Whilst a Brisbane based church stealing the children of materially poor Cambodians may not be ‘news’ (they are, after all poor, dark skinned and Asian!) the arrest of a white Anglo Saxon Australian on charges of ‘hindering’ will be news. I will quite happily be arrested if this leads to the media and the relevant regulatory authorities in Australia asking Citipointe to justify its removal of Rosa and Chita in 2008 and its continued retention of them in March 2014.

That Citipointe’s illegal removal of Rosa and Chita should happen with the tacit approval of the Global Development Group, disbursing $25 million a year in tax-deductible Australian aid, will certainly raise serious questions in the minds of donors when the circumstances surrounding my arrest lead them to read my Global Development Group blog:

http://globaldevelopmentgroup.blogspot.com/

And parishioners of Citipointe may have cause to think twice about donating to the church when they realize that, through the ‘SHE Rescue Home’, their donations and sponsorship monies are being used to break up families and indoctrinate children into the Christian faith. They will be able to find out how this has come about by visiting:

http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com/

best wishes

James Ricketson

Accused of posting pornography on my blog by Brisbane-based Citipointe church!

Leigh Ramsey

322 Wecker Road

Carindale

QLD 4152                                                                                                

2^nd March 2014

Dear Leigh

Following on from my letter of 28^th Feb. I mistakenly identified the year as 2013.

A journalist has told me this afternoon that upon speaking with a clerk in the court (or police station, I am not sure which) he learned that what I have been accused of is posting ‘pornography’ on my blog. Given that it is Citipointe church that has made the allegations that have led to my being ‘accused’ of ‘prostitution’, could you please identify on what date I posted this ‘pornography’ and where on my blog it is to be found. As I have removed nothing from my blog it must still be there.

Given Pastor Brian Mulheran’s scarcely veiled threat to have me arrested, charged and banned from coming to Cambodia again, and given the lengths to which Citipointe church is going to (and has done for five year now) to retain custody of Rosa and Chita this ‘prostitution’ or ‘pornography’ charge comes as no real surprise.

I realize that in a Cambodian court evidence plays a very small (or non-existent) role in determining guilt or innocence. However, for the benefit of those to whom I am copying this letter – including the Global Development Group (GDG), the Australian Council for International Development, Billie Jean Slott, (the lawyer acting for GDG), Australia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and an assortment of journalists – I wish to go on record that at around 5.30 Cambodian time on Sunday 2^nd March (9.30 Sydney time) I requested of the church that it supply evidence that I am guilty of either ‘prostitution’ or of posting ‘pornography’ on my blog.

I request also, as I have been for five years, that Citipointe provide Chanti and Chhork, myself and all those to whom this letter is copied, with documented evidence that your church has, this past five years, had a legal right to detain Rosa and Chita contrary to the express wishes of their parents – Chanti and Chhork.

If you are unable to supply evidence of the legality of your church’s actions you are in breach of Cambodian law and liable to a jail sentence for ‘trafficking’. 

For your interest and for the interest of those to whom I am copying this, I have attached letters that I wrote to the board of the Global Development Fund on 1^st March 2014 and 2^nd March 2014.

best wishes

James Ricketson