of association in the context of educational institutions and establishments. Article 1 of the Education Circular states: “Associations, NGOs or any agencies are not allowed to conduct any activities at the educational institutions without the permission from the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport.” Therefore, the Education Circular provides a greater restriction upon the right to freedoms of expression and association than contained within the Education Law. Whereas the Education Law allowed for associations and NGOs to conduct “neutral” activities at educational institutions, there is now a blanket ban on all activities carried out by any NGO, association or agency unless permission has been granted by the MoEYS. Any restriction on the freedoms of expression and association must be prescribed by law, necessary and proportionate. The Education Circular effectively imposes a complete restriction on freedom of association in educational institutions, subject to permission from the MoEYS. The Circular is vaguely drafted and restricts a wide range of persons and activities. Thus, in addition to limiting CSOs that wish to conduct activities in educational institutions, it will also apply more broadly; for example, to students wishing to form associations or societies. Circulars are lower down in the hierarchy of Cambodia’s legal framework. They are ministerial implementing measures, and thus are designed to organise the implementation of other legislation, rather than to create new law. As a restriction on a constitutionally protected fundamental freedom, and given that the Circular appears to be inconsistent with the Education Law itself, it is unclear whether the measures provided for in the Education Circular are valid in the domestic legal order, adding a further lack of clarity to the legal framework governing freedom of expression and freedom of association. Law on the Denial of Crimes Committed During Democratic Kampuchea (Denial Law) The Denial Law states that anyone who refuses to recognise, denies, opposes the existence of or promotes the crimes committed during the Khmer Rouge era could face up to two years imprisonment and up to four million riels (USD 1,000) in fines.51 It is likely that this law also applies to the online space, though there are no cases to confirm this assumption. 51 Freeman, J. (2014, 6 June). KR denial law sees no cases in 1st year. The Phnom Penh Post. www.phnompenhpost.com/national/ kr-denial-law-sees-no-cases-1st-year The Denial Law is contrary to provisions protecting freedom of expression under both domestic and international law. Education, debate, discussion and research into the Khmer Rouge era are essential in helping the country to move on and to prevent similar events from reoccurring. A law aiming at restricting opinions and debate about the crimes perpetrated by the Khmer Rouge could potentially stifle such invaluable discussion. Furthermore, the Denial Law could be used for political purposes to control the historical narrative surrounding the Khmer Rouge – which is particularly problematic given that many figures in the current Cambodian government were themselves Khmer Rouge commanders and officials.52 Law on Access to Information The right to information is crucial for the protection of other human rights like the freedom of expression. As stated by the UN General Assembly during its first session in 1946, “freedom of information is a fundamental human right and is the touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated.”53 The Draft Law on Access to Information contains important restrictions on the right to information. According to Article 20 of the Draft Law, any information that would (1) damage Cambodia’s national security and public order, (2) affect international relations, (3) threaten the economy or finances, or (4) affect case files or confidentialities of the court, could be withheld from the public. Public institutions may also deny providing information to the public if the disclosure of such information would (5) violate the personal privacy of individuals, (6) endanger law enforcement agencies and their missions, or (7) be harmful to legal documents and other prohibitive provisions on confidential information. The Draft Law gives examples of which types of information would be considered confidential. It mentions civil servants’ cases, health-related cases and case files of private rights litigation. This list is not limited and could therefore be interpreted broadly. These provisions are vague and could be misused to prevent the disclosure of a wide range of information.54 52 CCHR. (2013). CCHR expresses grave concern relating to the potential impact of a Khmer Rouge crimes denial law on Freedom of Expression in Cambodia. cchrcambodia.org/media/files/ press_release/391_200cpcecrtpkrcdle_en.pdf 53 UN General Assembly. (1946, 14 December). Calling of an International Conference on Freedom of Information. A/RES/59. www.refworld.org/docid/3b00f0975f.html 54 Turton, S. (2015, 10 June). Officials’ affairs may be secret under law. The Phnom Penh Post. www.phnompenhpost.com/national/ officials-affairs-may-be-secret-under-law 44 / Unshackling Expression