The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) condemns the decision of the Supreme Court of Cambodia to uphold the 14-year prison sentences imposed on journalists Phorn Sopheap and Pheap Pheara, despite accepting an amicus curiae brief submitted by the IBAHRI setting out Cambodia’s obligations under international human rights law. The criminalisation of journalists via the imposition of lengthy custodial sentences for legitimate reporting is a grave and disproportionate interference with the rights protected by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), by which Cambodia is bound.

IBAHRI calls for legal and policy reform

Following the judgment in this case, the IBAHRI urges Cambodian authorities to:

• grant Phorn Sopheap and Pheap Pheara a royal pardon;
• urgently review the convictions and sentences in light of Cambodia’s obligations under the ICCPR, including Articles 14 and 19;
• cease the use of the Criminal Code and national security allegations to prosecute journalists engaged in legitimate public-interest reporting, unless the authorities can demonstrate, by clear and specific evidence, a direct and immediate connection between the publication and a legitimate national security harm;
• review and amend/remove legislation that unduly restricts freedom of expression; and
• ensure that journalists can carry out their work free from censorship, intimidation and arbitrary criminal prosecution.

Acceptance of IBAHRI amicus curiae brief establishes an important precedent

The Supreme Court’s acceptance of the IBAHRI’s amicus curiae brief represents an important procedural development.

The IBAHRI filed its amicus curiae brief on 17 June 2026 ahead of the appeal hearing, urging the Court to apply regional and international standards governing freedom of expression, media freedom and the use of criminal sanctions against journalists.

There is currently no established procedure governing amicus curiae interventions before the Cambodian Supreme Court. By accepting the submission – following prior practice before the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia for the Prosecution of Crimes Committed during the Period of Democratic Kampuchea – the Supreme Court has established a valuable precedent that may enable future third-party legal interventions in cases raising significant human rights and rule of law issues.

International law requires strict safeguards for restrictions on journalism

In its amicus curiae, the IBAHRI reminded the Court that Cambodia is bound by international human rights law protecting freedom of expression, including under Article 19 of the ICCPR.

Article 19 protects not only the right to impart information, but also the public’s right to seek and receive it. Any restriction on that right must be clearly prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim and be necessary and proportionate. Where national security is invoked, the authorities must demonstrate, by clear and specific evidence, a direct connection between the expression in question and a real threat to a legitimate national security interest. Generalised assertions of risk are insufficient.

The judgment also raises serious questions under Article 14 of the ICCPR, including whether the courts subjected the national security justification to rigorous scrutiny, gave adequate reasons for rejecting the international standards placed before them and ensured that the conviction and sentence were compatible with the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal.

Crucially, criminal sanctions should only be used against journalists in exceptional circumstances. In this case, where there was no demonstrated malintent, no identified concrete harm arising from the publication, nor incitement to violence, a criminal 14-year custodial sentence constitutes disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression.

Judgment raises wider concerns for media freedom

The judgment comes against a backdrop of continued deterioration in Cambodia’s media freedom environment.

According to the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index, Cambodia now ranks 151st out of 180 countries and territories globally for press freedom (with 180 indicating the lowest level of press freedom). Authoritative reports reveal that news outlets and independent journalists in the country face frequent threats and intimidation for the legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Censorship and restricted access to information are also widespread, alongside repeated use of the Cambodian Criminal Code to prosecute journalists.

Why this matters

The case of the journalists Phorn Sopheap and Pheap Pheara is likely to become an important reference point for the future application of national security legislation against journalists in Cambodia and illustrates the continuing tension between domestic criminal law and the country’s international human rights obligations.

Media freedom is an essential component of a free and functioning democratic society. IBAHRI is deeply concerned that the restrictions on media freedom in Cambodia do not align with international human rights law and will have broader repercussions on civic space in the country.

Mark Stephens CBE, IBAHRI Co-Chair, commented: ‘This case represents a profound miscarriage of justice. Journalists performing their essential public watchdog role should not face fourteen years’ imprisonment for reporting on matters of public interest. Cambodian citizens have a right to be informed. That right cannot be meaningful in an environment where journalists face repeated attacks, criminalisation and restrictions on their work. The decision of the Supreme Court will deter independent reporting, chill public-interest journalism and undermine the public’s right to receive information.’

Hina Jilani, IBAHRI Co-Chair, commented: ‘International human rights law sets an exceptionally high threshold for restricting freedom of expression on national security grounds. In the absence of evidence demonstrating a specific threat, or of incitement to violence or hatred, criminal sanctions of this severity cannot be regarded as strictly necessary or proportionate. The judgment is inconsistent with Cambodia's international human rights obligations and undoubtedly will result in a chilling effect on media freedom in Cambodia.’

Baroness Helena Kennedy LT KC, the IBAHRI’s Director, commented: ‘The Supreme Court of Cambodia had an important opportunity to reinforce the rule of law by aligning its approach with Cambodia’s binding international human rights commitments. While the Court’s acceptance of the IBAHRI’s amicus curiae brief is a welcome procedural development that may strengthen future human rights litigation, its decision to uphold 14-year custodial sentences is a significant setback for freedom of expression and judicial protection of fundamental rights. Independent journalism is indispensable to democratic society, and courts play a vital role in ensuring that criminal law is not used to suppress legitimate reporting.’

The Supreme Court judgment preceded the first official visit by the United Nations appointed Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, Tom Andrews, from 20–31 July 2026, during which freedom of expression was among the issues examined. The IBAHRI urges the Special Rapporteur to scrutinise this judgment and its surrounding circumstances in his forthcoming report, including whether the convictions, sentences and judicial reasoning comply with Cambodia’s obligations under the ICCPR, particularly Articles 14 and 19.

The IBAHRI further calls for the case to be raised in the follow-up to Cambodia’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and in the next UPR cycle, including by the rapporteurs/troika and Member States, as an emblematic test of Cambodia’s compliance with international norms on freedom of expression, fair trial rights, legality, necessity and proportionality.

ENDS

Contact: IBAHRI@int-bar.org

Notes:

1. The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), established in 1995 under Founding Honorary President Nelson Mandela, is an autonomous and financially independent entity, working to promote, protect and enforce human rights under a just rule of law, and to preserve the independence of the judiciary and the legal profession worldwide.

2. Find the IBAHRI (@IBAHRI) on social media here:
   • x.com/IBAHRI
   • bsky.app/profile/ibahri.bsky.social
   • facebook.com/IBAhumanrights
   • linkedin.com/in/iba-human-rights-institute

3. The International Bar Association (IBA), the global voice of the legal profession, is the foremost organisation for international legal practitioners, bar associations and law societies. Established in 1947, shortly after the creation of the United Nations, it was born out of the conviction that an organisation made up of the worlds' bar associations could contribute to global stability and peace through the administration of justice.

Website page link for this news release:

Short link: tinyurl.com/bdfycpn7
Full link: www.ibanet.org/IBAHRI-condemns-decision-to-uphold-14-year-sentences-for-journalists-in-Cambodian-Supreme-Court-case-and-calls-for-reform