A/HRC/15/46 VI. The main challenges for the judiciary 40. In any democracy the courts should enable justice to triumph over arbitrary politics. It is primarily the duty of judges to protect their independence and integrity against outside interference, political or financial. The judiciary has an obligation to dispense justice in accordance with the Constitution and law, quite apart from the universally accepted norms and standards of justice, fairness and due process of law; but it lacks the physical and legal structure needed to enable it to function as an independent judiciary. By the Government’s own admission, “the judiciary has not yet gained full confidence from the public.”3 By strengthening the independence of the judiciary and demonstrating its commitment to genuine rule of law and stronger democracy, the political leadership would be sending a very positive message to the people, the Government and judiciary itself, and to the international community. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that an independent judiciary is not only important in building a fairer and more democratic society but also in enhancing the image of the country internationally. For instance, in order to maintain the momentum and accelerate economic development Cambodia will need to attract more foreign investment in appropriate sectors of the economy. Some of the most important factors that the majority of prospective foreign investors take into account before deciding to invest large amounts of money in any country are an independent judiciary and a robust system of justice. 41. Although the Constitution of Cambodia provides for the separation of powers between the three main organs of the State, in practice the distinction between these organs is blurred and the executive branch dominates the judiciary whether by providing resources to the judiciary or in making appointments to various judicial positions. This remains a key challenge for the country in implementing the rule of law and in promoting and protecting people’s rights. The Special Rapporteur is aware of the impact of the tragic past on the judiciary and notes that the efforts made in reconstructing it have been commendable. However, the judiciary still has a long way to go to assert and establish its independence, and the executive and the legislative branches have to adopt a number of measures to enable it to do so. On a number of occasions and especially in high-profile political cases, the judiciary seems to have allowed itself to be used or manipulated for political or purely private purposes. 42. The courts are not trusted by the people to provide impartial justice. As a consequence, citizens seek alternative methods of remedy which tend to undermine further the rule of law. In land disputes, communities tend to bypass the court system, petitioning top leaders to intervene on their behalf, reinforcing the already overwhelming executive authority. Prior to the war, Norodom Sihanouk was the focus of these petitions. Nowadays, groups of villagers are almost permanently encamped outside the gates of the Prime Minister’s residences in Kandal province and in Phnom Penh. Interventions by the Prime Minister are frequent in response to direct petitions by private citizens. 43. The quality of legal argumentation in the courtroom is disappointing and often nonexistent. Until recent reforms made it a requirement for reasoned arguments to be included in judgments, judges rarely supported their verdicts with a sound analysis of the law. The line of logic running through some legal arguments is often difficult to follow. Even in high-profile cases such as those concerning Ms. Mu Sochua, a member of parliament and leading member of the main opposition party, the courts at all levels failed to provide convincing legal reasoning for their judgments. Rather than entering into the merits of the 3 National report submitted by Cambodia to the Human Rights Council: (A/HRC/WG.6/6KHM/1, para 101). 11