Ten Years After the ADHOC 5, Cambodia’s Human Rights Defenders Are Still Paying the Price

The international human rights system depends on the work of local defenders, but offers them little protection once they become politically inconvenient.

The exterior of the Cambodian Supreme Court in Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Ten years ago this April, five Cambodian human rights defenders were arrested in a case that shook the country’s civil society and made headlines around the world. Staff from the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC), along with a former official of the National Election Committee, were arrested and imprisoned for assisting in a $204 bribe related to an alleged affair by Kem Sokha, the vice president of the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party. They were held in prison for 427 days before being released on bail.

It was a politically charged, fabricated allegation. The case was widely seen as a warning to civil society that the government’s tolerance for human rights advocacy in Cambodia had effectively ended.

Many observers have expressed alarm about Cambodia’s shrinking civic space, but I am alarmed that few seem to understand what civil society actually needs to survive. Attention should also focus on the disappearance of the lawyers needed to defend it. This is not simply because lawyers are unwilling to take on human rights cases out of fear. Rather, the entire ecosystem that once supported human rights lawyers has collapsed. Lawyers report widespread harassment and isolation, increasing professional restrictions, and an increase in security risks linked to declining financial support and resources.

Over the past five years, I have repeatedly sounded the alarm about the rapid decline in the number of lawyers able or willing to represent human rights defenders. I have called for urgent action to protect access to justice. These calls have largely gone ignored.

When I have raised these concerns with diplomats who fly in and out of Phnom Penh, the response is often not just dismissive but irresponsible and privileged: “What is the point when the justice system is not independent?” That attitude encapsulates the despairing reality for Cambodian lawyers: the infrastructure meant to protect them is weak, while those with the power and resources to strengthen it fundamentally misunderstand the situation.

Donors often complain about “lack of impact,” but true impact isn’t measured in reports or numbers; it is measured in presence, accountability, and the willingness to stand by those under threat. If donors can afford to train civil society, they can afford to ensure civil society is protected.

This reflects a deeper systemic failure. The international human rights system depends on local defenders to document abuses, sustain advocacy, and give meaning to its institutions. Yet it offers little protection once those defenders become politically inconvenient. Support is often conditional, and attention is always fleeting.

Words of concern continue to flow from diplomatic missions, but there is little action on the ground. Over the past decade, many foreign embassies have issued repeated statements expressing alarm at Cambodia’s shrinking civic space. But for activists living under surveillance, harassment, and intimidation, these declarations have done little to change their reality. Is the United Nations Human Rights Council meant to hold governments accountable?

Former Australian High Court Justice Michael Kirby, the first U.N. special representative for human rights in Cambodia, warned in his 1994 report “Cambodia – Unequal Suffering, Unique Opportunity,” that the country “is struggling to rebuild the infrastructure that will protect human rights. It deserves more support from the international community than mere words. Words are cheap.” Kirby’s words........

© The Diplomat