Case Study Of Shukaku Inc. Company

Shukaku Inc. Company is a foreign company wanted to invest in Cambodia for purposes to develop Boeung Kak Lake into a high-end residential, commercial and tourism complex. Likewise, there is a land dispute between the investor and the resident after the agreement of Shukaku Company and Cambodia government had been made with a 99 years lease. On top of that, the government asked the families living there to move away from the land but provide compensations such as money $8,000 compensation, getting a 32 meter square apartment located at Damnak Trayoeng which is 20 kilometers from the city center and the last option is to get on-site upgrading which means they will owned a plot of 48 meter square located in Boeung Kak area. But, not everyone
Tep Vanny was the first woman who has formed an activist group in order to fight against Boeung Kak land grab and try to appeal the case to the municipal court in Phnom Penh. Despite, the four Boeung Kak’s activists, Tep Vanny, Bo Chhorry, Heng Mom and Kong Chantha were distracted by security guards while trying to submit a petition which is a formal written request have signed by many people, to the city hall for requesting the establishment of a committee to address their long-running land dispute. Howover, they were considering of being arrest six months in jail due to being guilty of insulting and obstructing public officially. After the ruling from the court, Tep Vanny believed that the government violates her rights after so many unfair conviction. She that, “Decisions by these courts is very influenced by the people in power and the rich. Judges are afraid of losing their jobs if they don’t follow the orders from the
The court shall not decline any dispute since it is within its obligation to accept all legal cases and protect the right and freedom of its citizens. The activists’ complaint to the court on the ground of land dispute and their freedom being infringed upon. However, the land dispute was rejected and ignored. One the other hand, the court also has to review all of the evidences and eye witnesses before accusing someone of being guilty adhering strictly and consistently to laws. The judges made snap decisions in regard to Tep Vanny cases based on weak evidences on the ground of obstructing public official’s work, when it was the public official that incited the violence first. For The Supreme court has obligation to examine the decision of the municipal court if there is a possibility that the decision made by the municipal court is unjust. The Supreme Court rejected Tep Vanny’s appeals despite the fact that the appeal was due to the unjust nature of the decision made by the municipal court to convict