Phnom Penh: The General Secretariat of the National Committee to Combat Human Trafficking (NCCT) has ordered Colonel Khieu Songchansothea to report and explain to the Disciplinary Council of the NCCT to take action according to the procedures and disciplinary code of the Cambodian National Police. The NCCT always educates the internal regulations and disciplinary code of the Cambodian National Police to avoid unethical behavior in performing their duties.
Through the information clarification of the General Secretariat of the National Election Commission dated April 26, 2026, an attempt was made to explain that the actions of Colonel Khieu Songchansothea were “misconduct outside of work hours” and were “individual responsibility.” However, this clarification raises a big question that the organization cannot ignore:
1. The question of misuse of state means: If the organization claims that it is “off-duty time” or a “personal matter”, why did Mr. Khieu Songchansothea use a car with police license plates (state property) for personal purposes until midnight? Does the internal regulations of the National Police allow officials to use state vehicles for personal purposes?
2. Is using a police car to threaten citizens an individual offense or a violation of organizational discipline?
When an officer rides in a police car and threatens to beat up a citizen and put him in prison, it is no longer an ordinary individual matter, because this person has used “state power” and “state means” to oppress the conscience.
3. Contradictions in law enforcement:
- Common people: A boy took a picture holding a sword (a personal matter, outside of school hours) but was caught by the police and immediately sent to prison.
•5 high-ranking officials: Used a state vehicle for the wrong purpose, smoked e-cigarettes in violation of government bans, and threatened the public, but the unit responded that it was a “personal matter” and only asked to file a report?
Please note that on the night of the incident, there was an operation to crack down on a shop called Russey Sros, while a police car was parked near the shop. The public thought that the explanation given by the police was a “personal matter” and that the police were trying to suppress the incident. It is just an excuse.
The interpretation that it is an “off-duty person” will have weight only if the person uses his own means (a car with a civil license plate), but as long as he still uses a “police car” to cause trouble, the unit cannot escape responsibility and criticism from the public.
