Workers Violently Assaulted in Protest

Serious rights violation took place on July 27, 2010, in Sen Sok district where around 3,000 PCCS workers had been protesting in order to demand the Malaysian factory owner (boss) to give a chance for their union leader to go back to work again after she had absurdly been suspended. Those workers were planning to protest until they could reach their goal. However, they failed to do that because the authorities used a group of around 100 district police officers to force them to go back to work.

That day at least 15 women workers were wounded in the suppression, which those police men used electric batons, shields and weapons to break, hit and shock them.

One of the victims, Keut Chanthy reported that she was hit and pushed and fell over to the ground. Her trousers were torn apart. She could hardly, she added, believe the authorities, who should have protected the people, cruelly treated like that to them.

Sin Ratanak, the union leader in the factory, who also witnessed the event reported to the media Tuesday 27 July that when those police officers arrived, they did not say anything, but were running up to workers, using their stuff; such as shields, electric batons to beat and shock them. They judged people like animals. As a result, a pregnant woman was unconscious. Some were hit on the arms; and others were wounded at the legs. In total, there were 15 people injured.

However, Sen Sok District Inspector Mok Hong denied his followers had committed the violence; and no workers were wounded. The pressure was only taken in order to make way for traffic.

PCCS Garment Limited, located in Toek Thlar commune, Sen Sok district, Phnom Penh, belongs to a Malaysian owner. For about a week before the protest, the factory had suspended Ms. Morn Channa, who was the workers’ representative, for the accusation of corruption in giving workers permission to have day(s) off. For that reason she incited other workers to protest against the factory.

In contrast, Ms. Morn Channa revealed that the factory had attempted to dismiss her from the job for a long time because she had normally protected the workers’ interests and rights; and that she had not been doing anything wrong as accused at all.