01005724 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 of August 1975 that the Kratie Market could not be permitted to continue as “commerce could not serve the lives of the people and could not serve the war of national liberation. It was clearly seen by mid-73 that there was no way out for us. We could not gather up the people. The businessmen were the masters.”292 Therefore the solution was to impose collectivisation. After the people were collectivised and communal eating began, money stopped being circulated, the markets were closed in Kratie, and the town was evacuated.293 107. In another example, Witness François PONCHAUD testified as to the transfer of the population of Kampong Cham in 1973, where he had lived prior to 1970.294 Based on accounts of villagers who were expelled from their homes, the Witness testified that when Khmer Rouge soldiers captured a village, the houses in the village would be set on fire, the commune chiefs would be executed and people would be moved to the forest.295 While Witness PHY Phuon claimed that the Khmer Rouge did not control Kampong Cham long enough to evacuate the population and the people quickly returned after the Khmer Rouge withdrew, the Chamber does not find this evidence reliable concerning this specific issue.296 His opinion was speculative and differs markedly from other, more detailed, accounts describing the transfer of the city’s population.297 292 Revolutionary Flag, E3/5, August 1975, ERN (En) 00401481. T. 19 June 2012 (YUN Kim) pp. 32-33; T. 6 May 2013 (Philip SHORT), p. 91. 294 T. 9 April 2013 (François PONCHAUD) pp. 13, 53-54, 56; T. 10 April 2013 (François PONCHAUD), p. 8; Written record of Witness Interview, E3/370, ERN 00333952, p. 4 (François PONCHAUD); Unique among foreign witnesses, François Ponchaud testified in Khmer for much of his testimony. Concerned by the quality of the interpretation of his testimony (see e.g., T. 10 April 2013, p. 96), the ECCC Interpretation and Translation Unit reexamined his testimony and recently amended the relevant transcripts. The Chamber notes that the amendments to the parts of the transcript cited in this judgement appear to have no impact on the substance of this evidence. In any event, the Chamber relies on the original language of the testimony where there is any doubt. 295 T. 9 April 2013 (François PONCHAUD) p. 61; T. 10 April 2013 (François PONCHAUD) p. 3-4. 296 T. 31 July 2012 (ROCHOEM Ton alias PHY Phuon), p. 39. 297 T. 6 May 2013 (Philip SHORT), pp. 91-92; Book by P. SHORT: Pol Pot: The History of a Nightmare, E3/9, 2004, p. 257, ERN (En) 00396465 (discussing the evacuation of 15,000 dwellers from Kampong Cham in the second half of 1973, stated that some died of hunger and from bombings along the way, but most were resettled in villages where, as one peasant put it, ‘they lived a normal life’); Document by KE Pauk: Autobiography of Ke Pauk from 1949-1985, E3/2782, undated, ERN (En) 00089710 (explaining that there was to be a two-pronged attack of Kampong Cham, but KOY Thuon’s forces did not attack and they were unable to liberate the town completely, surrounding it instead); See also, Book by W. SHAWCROSS: Sideshow:Kissinger, Nixon and the Destruction of Cambodia, E3/88, 1991, p. 312 (“The day after the [American] bombing ended, the Communists launched an assault on the provincial capital of Kompong Cham, a vital road and river junction northeast of Phnom Penh. Through the summer they had easily rolled up the garrisons defending the 293 Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 57