Agreement To Khmer
The second phase of the resumption of negotiations took place in Phnom Penh from 13 to 17 March 2003. These negotiations resulted in a draft agreement signed by Mr Sok An and myself on 17 March 2003. The draft is attached to the Secretary-General`s report on the Khmer Rouge processes, which describes the negotiations and provides detailed explanations on many of the issues discussed, as well as the reason for their resolution. The birth of the agreement between the United Nations and Cambodia was a letter dated 21 June 1997, addressed by the two Prime Ministers of the Royal Cambodian Government to then-Secretary-General Kofi Annan, requesting “the help of the United Nations and the international community in bringing to justice those responsible for the genocide and crimes against humanity committed during the Rule of the Khmer Rouge from 1975 to 1979”. The letter also stated: “We are aware of similar efforts to respond to the genocide and crimes against humanity committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia and we are asking for similar assistance to Cambodia.” Referring to paragraph 1 of the resolution, the Secretary-General considered that any agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Cambodia to comply with the provisions of the resolution should meet seven specific conditions, which are contained in paragraph 10 of the Secretary-General`s report on the Khmer Rouge (A/57/769). In light of these conditions, the Secretary-General considered that the resumption of negotiations should be based on the draft agreement and should be seen as the starting point for previous negotiations between the United Nations and the Cambodian government, which concluded on 8 February 2002. At the same time, he also felt that the General Assembly had given him a clear and unequivocal mandate to negotiate an agreement that would contain certain amendments to the draft. 4) Legality – agreements that violate certain laws or public order are generally invalid and therefore unenforceable. For example, agreements that violate certain laws are those relating to the commission of criminal offences, the consideration of usurious interests or the inappropriate restriction of trade.
For example, contrary to public policy agreements are those that commit the rights of a thief or that interfere with the judicial or administrative administration or the public service. 5) Formality – Both oral and written contracts are generally enforceable. But certain types of contracts normally have to be written to be enforceable. The meaning agreements that must be drafted in many legal systems include those that have a core interest in the land; those that cannot be completed within one year; Guarantee agreements and those for the sale of goods on a certain amount of money.