A/HRC/15/46 case, courts tend to give their judgments on technical grounds. In another example, the land dispute in Koh Pich, an island in the Tonle Basac River, the Municipality of Phnom Penh had brought a case to the municipal court against the families residing on the island. This move was against the law as the land was unregistered and thus was under the jurisdiction of the Cadastral Commissions under article 47 of the 2001 Land Law. The Community Legal Education Centre (CLEC – a Cambodian legal aid NGO), the lawyers who were representing the families, requested that the case be transferred to the Cadastral Commission (CC). Yet the municipal court proceeded with the case and decided that families had to leave and would receive compensation at a much lower rate than the prevailing market rate. The lawyers brought a request for an injunction order until the main case (transfer to the CC) was decided upon. The Municipality countered the request and the municipal court ruled in favour of the Municipality. Allegedly, the judge was reported to have said that he did not want to hear the evidence stating that the “City Hall gave me the case” even when lawyers came with evidence of possession rights. No legal analysis on the merits of the case was made. Two families decided to appeal. The Appeal Court upheld the decision of the municipal court. These are numerous similar cases. 44. In the absence of the law on the status of judges and prosecutors guaranteeing their security of tenure and independence, the judges seem to be operating to a greater or lesser extent in a climate of fear in which they are careful not to take steps which might attract criticism from people in power and in prominent positions. The ways in which they respond to this climate is clear from their behaviour in politically sensitive cases progressing through the courts. At present, judges are governed by general civil service laws and those above the age of 60 can be retired at the discretion of the executive or retained for political loyalty beyond this age and often beyond the age of 65. Prosecutors tend to accept criminal complaints from prominent political figures without question—this is particularly the case with charges of criminal defamation and disinformation—and such cases invariably result in convictions, even when culpatory evidence is lacking and exculpatory evidence is abundant. Judges in lower courts tend to be more fearful of taking independent action than those in the higher courts. As a consequence there is a high rate of appeals all the way to the Supreme Court. 45. A recent illustration was the decision of the Supreme Court in December 2008 to release the men convicted of the murder of a trade union leader, Chea Vichea, and to request the Appeal Court to re-examine the case. The case against the two men had become a cause célèbre because there was almost no evidence against them but an abundance of exculpatory evidence. The original trial had failed to meet basic procedural standards and the Appeal Court had attracted international criticism in failing to correct these errors. Yet in reality the case was of such political significance that it is inconceivable that a lower court could have acquitted the men, despite the lack of evidence against them, without a clear indication from the Government that such a decision was acceptable. The original investigating judge courageously dismissed the case. Within weeks he was reassigned to a remote provincial court and the case was forced back to trial. 46. Another example relates to the case against the lawyers working for the CLEC. In June 2007, they were subjected to a legal action on charges of “incitement” if they continued to represent a community of indigenous people from Kong Yu and Kong Thom villages in Ratanakiri province in the legal action they had brought against a powerful and well-connected businesswoman for misappropriation of their lands. The case was the first attempt by an indigenous community to use the courts to obtain redress. In June 2007, the businesswoman filed a criminal complaint against 12 village representatives, their lawyers from CLEC and Legal Aid Cambodia and two representatives of Ratanakiri-based NGOs. She requested the Ratanakiri provincial prosecutor to investigate the case and pursue charges of fraud, defamation, incitement leading to the commission of a crime, incitement not leading to the commission of a crime and complicity in an offence. Although the 12