01005745 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 141. After the June 1974 meeting, everyone was instructed to disseminate information about the conclusions reached at the meeting in their respective zone of competence.406 A committee chaired by SON Sen and including KOY Thuon and other zone members was established to manage the evacuationof Phnom Penh.407 POL Pot and NUON Chea led a delegation to Vietnam to inform the Vietnamese leaders of the CPK plan to ‘liberate’ Phnom Penh and to request further supplies of weapons.408 142. Considering all of the above circumstances, the Chamber is satisfied that both KHIEU Samphan and IENG Sary were present at the June 1974 meeting at which the decision was made to evacuate Phnom Penh. Pursuant to the principle of democratic centralism, both acceded to the decision.409 KHIEU Samphan could have opposed the evacuation of Phnom Penh, but chose not to.410 3.4.2. February 1975 143. There was evidence to suggest that the evacuation of Phnom Penh was again discussed within the CPK in February 1975. Although Expert David CHANDLER recognised that opinions differ about this date,411 it was his view that the decision to evacuate the cities was made in February 1975,412 by which time the inhabitants of several smaller towns including Oudong and Kratie had already been forcibly transferred and the policy had been tested.413 In an interview given at a press conference in Beijing in IENG Sary’s presence POL Pot also stated that the decision to evacuate city residents to the countryside was one of the major factors for the 406 T. 14 December 2011 (NUON Chea), pp. 2-4. T. 30 January 2012 (NUON Chea), p. 18; T. 31 January 2012 (NUON Chea), pp. 37-38; IENG Thirith Interview by Kassekampen, E3/656, p. 1, ERN (En) S 00799180; T. 31 October 2013 (NUON Chea), pp. 23-24. 408 T. 13 December 2011 (NUON Chea), pp. 27-29. 409 See Section 5: Administrative Structures, paras 223-228; NUON Chea Interview by KHEM Ngun, E3/3, p. 22, ERN (En) 00184673 (“And since then, liberation in 75, it was united. As I see it, taking then people from the city, but the smashing, that was not known, the group down below went bad […]”) 410 KHIEU Samphan Interview Transcript, E3/4051, pp. 1-2, ERN (En) 00788872-73; Video of KHIEU Samphan Interview, E152.1.52R; NUON Chea Interview by Japanese Journalist, E3/26, undated, p. 8-9, ERN (En) 003929511-12 (“He [KHIEU Samphan] had power as well, he never said he had no power at all. But various and different duties. […] He did have some [power], but he had no power on his own. He pushed on the perimeters, helped with opinions, helped things.”) 411 T. 25 July 2012 (David CHANDLER), pp. 54-55. 412 T. 19 July 2012 (David CHANDLER), pp. 70-71, 74-75. 413 T. 18 July 2012 (David CHANDLER), pp. 44-45; T. 19 June 2012 (YUN Kim) pp. 32-33 (Kratie); T. 11 January 2013 (CHHAOM Se), pp. 47-50. 407 Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 78