The rewards of public service in Cambodia
Behind the Senate building in central Phnom Penh, a
recently retired customs department director is building an enormous
mansion worth millions. But the former public servant is far from the
only government official to own a palatial property
A young construction worker caked in dust gestures to the grandiose, off-white mansion behind him with a shrug.
Sitting on a 6,500 square-metre plot of premium real estate behind
the Senate in central Phnom Penh, the land alone is estimated to be
worth about $18 million. Include the lavish three-storey, 600 square
metre, two-building villa being constructed on it, and the property
would be worth much more.
“This is the biggest house [in Phnom Penh]. I have never seen a house
like this,” he says casually. “[But] he’s a rich man. With this kind of
money, they can get whatever they want.”
A middle-aged colleague, white hair peeking our from under his cap,
agrees. He is quick to add, however, that he didn’t think they could
afford it on just their salaries.
Pen Siman, the recently retired general director of the General
Department of Customs and Excise at the Ministry of Finance and a
personal adviser to Hun Sen, is the official owner. He currently lives
in a smaller villa abutting the site.
Former colleagues say he would have been earning about 3 million riel
($750) monthly when he retired as head of customs, a government
department that Hun Sen has previously chided for corruption, last
October.
Workers say that gold leaf and coins were put in the building’s
foundations for prosperity and describe the interior as opulent.
In a telephone interview this week, Siman claimed he only stumped up
about $10 million for the land a couple of years ago and that all taxes
were paid. He added that while his name is on the title, it actually
belongs to four people and his house sits on one of three lots.
Documents seen by Post Weekend show that the land was sold in two lots in 2012.
Siman said the mansion only “looks formidable” because the land was
waterlogged and so he had to build on ground one metre higher than
normal.
“Other people in Phnom Penh …have bigger houses than this, but they
just don’t appear [as big] as mine,” he said, adding that he welcomed
the opportunity to “clarify” the truth about his property.
He said he has declared it in asset declarations required by the Anti-Corruption Unit.
“I am not a greedy person or doing anything too unreasonable. I’m not a person like that.”
Siman is far from the only government official to own a palatial
property. Luxurious mansions around the city, and sprawling properties
on its outskirts, serve as a potent symbol to Cambodians that high
government positions are often synonymous with immense wealth.
Cham Prasidh, the current minister of industry and handicrafts, and
the former commerce minister, is believed to own a large portfolio of
properties around the country.
His 10-hectare former residential property not far from Pochentong
Airport in Samrong Krong commune is similar in size to the capital’s
most prominent high schools.
Land for sale in the vicinity had asking prices of $150 per square
metre last year, putting Prasidh’s landscaped and palm-tree fringed
estate, which features a large moat, at a minimum value of $15 million,
but likely much more.
Prasidh, whose tycoon wife Tep Bopha Prasidh has the honorific title
of oknha, declined to comment via phone and did not respond to an
emailed request for comment regarding the source of his wealth.
While the current salaries of ministers are not publicly available,
Prime Minister Hun Sen told reporters in 2011 that he was making $1,150 a
month.
Chea Sophara, the minister of rural development and a former governor
of Phnom Penh, owns an even grander property than Prasidh’s near Camko
City in Russey Keo district.
The regal 11-hectare estate, which boasts private golf holes,
Angkorian-style walls around its perimeter and no less than six luxury
villas of differing styles, is worth approximately $45 million just for
the land, according to a local real estate valuer.
Sophara declined to comment on the size or value of his estate but
said any explanation for how he could afford it would have to take into
account the situation in Phnom Penh after the fall of the Khmer Rouge,
when he and other Cambodian rebels liberated the country with the
invading Vietnamese.
“I have owned my land since January 7, 1979. If you look at the
history of that time, there were [at first] only 70 [Cambodians] in
Phnom Penh, so individuals could own several houses or several pieces of
land,” he said.
“It is easy for [people] to criticise senior CPP officials as
corrupt, but look at the history … No one was using money yet. I was the
commune chief at the time, my land was three metres deep in water, and
step by step I have developed it until today.
“Those people who make such criticisms came to Cambodia in 1991 and
many of them were retired people in foreign countries who came to create
a political party in the country. They don’t understand the history,
and their criticisms were made because of jealousy, envy or unfairness
due to hatred.”
Opposition party whip Son Chhay claimed several CPP ministers had
wealth in excess of $100 million. He said that public officials “have
the responsibility to explain” where that money came from.
According to Chhay, many top officials made their fortunes when the
Kampuchean People’s Revolutionary Party renamed itself the Cambodian
People’s Party in 1991, abandoning communism and opening its arms to
capitalism and land privatisation.
As Sebastian Strangio describes it in his recent book Hun Sen’s
Cambodia, state-owned land and businesses were sold off to government
officials, foreign investors and CPP-linked tycoons.
“All pre-1975 land claims were annulled, reassuring investors that
they would be safe from eviction if the old owners of the land
returned,” he writes.
“Phnom Penh became a boomtown. Wild speculation drove land values up
to dizzying heighs. Dilapidated villas that had lain vacant since the
Pol Pot regime were snapped up by government officials, who sold them
off to Thai and Singaporean businessmen or leased them to international
relief agencies scrambling for a foothold in the Cambodian ‘aid
market’.”
According to Chhay, the period following the 2008 election, when the
CPP obtained a dominant 90 seats in the National Assembly, was the
second period when officials made significant sums of money, mostly
through economic land concessions or property swaps.
Chhay does not buy the former Phnom Penh governor Chea Sophara’s argument.
“Why is he able to have so much land when there are so many people in
Phnom Penh who do not have the privilege of owning so much land [now]
and in [1979], too?” he said.
“And this is [another] question. Look at the houses inside the land,
so many big houses there, it did not come cheap. He has all of his
children in there in houses that cost millions and millions of dollars.
Where does this money come from?”
Chhay added that officials like Pen Siman, the former customs head,
are not afraid to flaunt their wealth despite questions about how it was
gained “because they think it’s something that they have the right to
do, or they have the party protecting them”.
Two senior customs officials told Post Weekend on condition of
anonymity that lucrative positions in the customs and excise department –
at ports and border crossings, for example – required “at least $50,000
to $70,000” to be paid upwards – but could not provide evidence of the
practice.
“Some individual customs officers have sold their houses or borrowed
money to bribe for a job and position,” one of the officials claimed.
A 2007 US Embassy cable describes Siman’s wife, Ngyn Sun Sopheap, as a
business associate of Attwood Import Export Company chief Lim Chhiv Ho.
The customs officials said that Siman’s name was a free pass for imported goods.
“I don’t know about other businesses of Pen Siman, but all cargo
transportation is untouchable if you say it belongs to him,” an official
said.
Post Weekend could not independently verify the claims.
Siman denied the corruption allegations. He said that the promotion
and appointment of officials at the department had been up to the
Ministry of Economy and Finance and not himself.
Bou Bunnara, head of the Customs Department’s public relations unit,
only said that he “didn’t know” when asked to comment on allegations of
corruption.
CPP spokesman and lawmaker Sous Yara said that critical “individual
perceptions” about the properties of government officials could not be
taken as general public opinion.
“The regime is committed to multi-party democracy and also [to] stand
on the principle of free-market economics. So whoever has the ability
to raise their family’s development without interfering in the public
interest, you don’t have anything to accuse them,” he said in a phone
interview.
“The free market means [it is for] all. Everyone who lives under this
society will benefit from economic growth. If you are an officer, you
have a rule that before you enter the public service you have to
announce your property, and when you [leave] office you have to declare
your property. As long as they abide by this rule, we have no comment on
that.”
Asset declarations at the Anti-Corruption Unit are kept confidential
and only opened in the case that the chairman decides to investigate.
Good governance groups such as Transparency International have urged the
government to change legislation to make them public.
“Questions should be raised, as it is difficult — if not impossible —
to comprehend how a government official who earns around USD1,000 a
month can own a property worth millions. But these questions cannot be
answered if public officials are not required to declare their assets
publicly,” Transparency International Cambodia executive director Preap
Kol said in an email.
He said that while the 2010 Anti-Corruption Law contains a provision
on “illicit enrichment”, defined as an unexplainable increase in the
wealth of public officials, the fact that asset declarations are not
available for public scrutiny makes investigations under this
“impossible in practice”.
Opposition lawmaker Chhay agreed, adding that if the ACU were truly
independent, it would investigate civil servants and government
officials that own lavish properties.
ACU vice-president Nuon Sophal said, however, that under the
anti-corruption law, the unit cannot simply questions individuals
without a complaint.
“The rights of individual citizens are important, and if we question them, it means we are investigating,” he said.
“If there is no evidence, it would be a violation of the rights of the individual.”
លុយខ្មោចម៉ែគាត់ចែកអោយ
ReplyDelete