Cambodia Law On Agreement
In a letter addressed to the Secretary-General on 3 March 1999, the Government of Cambodia warned that any decision to bring the Khmer Rouge leaders to justice must take into account Cambodia`s needs for peace and national reconciliation. At a meeting with the Secretary-General on 12 March 1999, representatives of the Government of Cambodia informed the Secretary-General that he believed that the Courts of Cambodia had full jurisdiction to conduct such proceedings (A/53/850-S/1999/231). On 17 June 1999, the Government of Cambodia requested the United Nations to provide experts to assist Cambodia in drafting legislation providing for a special national jurisdiction that would bring Khmer Rouge leaders to justice and provide for the participation of foreign judges and prosecutors in proceedings. Following that request, the Secretary-General initiated negotiations with the Government with a view to reaching agreement on how such a tribunal should be organized and how the United Nations should provide or arrange its assistance to establish it and help it function. These negotiations lasted two and a half years (report of the Secretary-General on the Khmer Rouge trials, A/57/769). 4) Legality – Agreements that violate certain laws or public order are generally invalid and therefore unenforceable. Examples of agreements contrary to certain laws are the agreement to commit crimes, collect usurious interest rates or unduly limit trade. For example, agreements that violate public order are those that commit offences or undermine the administration of justice or the civil service.