002/19-09-2007-ECCC-OCIJ ЮŲŠ / No: D427 of a political autobiography written by the detainee who, under duress, ended up confessing to treason and implicating other traitors working for the secret services of foreign powers considered to be enemies of the Cambodian revolution.1986 The ‘truth’ that these confessions were supposed to reveal was, in many respects, defined beforehand, since the interrogators, who had been instructed by Duch to establish the existence of links with the CIA, the KGB and/or the Vietnamese, forced detainees to provide pre-determined answers.1987 456. Written confessions obtained by the interrogators were transmitted to Duch accompanied by their interrogation reports.1988 Duch read, analyzed, annotated1989 and meticulously summarised1990 most of these confessions, in order to report them to his superiors.1991 Rape at S-21 457. In the Judgment in the Duch Case, the Trial Chamber found that one incident of rape occurred at S-21.1992 An S-21 staff member inserted a stick into the vagina of a detainee during interrogation.1993 According to Duch, when the rape incident was reported to him, he discussed it with Hor. He states that he ordered Hor to reprimand the offender. Duch added that he reported the incident to his superiors, but received no response. He therefore did not punish the perpetrator, but merely assigned him to interrogate someone else. He also subsequently gave instructions that interrogations of female prisoners were to be conducted by the wives of cadres. Although this measure was implemented,1994 according to Prak Khan, the female interrogators were all ultimately arrested, and by 1977, female prisoners were again interrogated by men.1995 458. Furthermore, civil party [REDACTED] states that she was raped during her detention at S21 in 1977 by a guard whom she recognised during the Duch trial before the ECCC. The rape took place in an individual cell while she was in chains, and led to vaginal bleeding which lasted for several days. The guard in question also threatened to kill her if she mentioned the rape to anyone.1996 In its Judgment in the Duch case, the Trial Chamber rejected [REDACTED] Civil Party application, finding that the evidence she submitted was not sufficient to establish notably that she was detained at S-21.1997 Following this rejection, the facts set out above, which are distinct from the ones put forward at the hearing, have now come to light, and led the Co-Investigating Judges to conduct a second interview in Case No.002. After this new investigative action, the Co-Investigative Judges consider that the clarification provided by this Civil Party appears credible and sufficient according to the requirements at this stage of the proceedings. Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, National Road 4, Choam Chao, Dangkao Phnom Penh Mailing address: P.O. Box 71, Phnom Penh; Tel: +855(0)23 218914 Fax: +855(0) 23 218941. 118