 So I just wanted to ask firstly if you could tell us briefly about how DCCAM came to exist. I know it's a long complicated story. Well, let me make it short. It came to exist as a research office of Yale University supported by the US State Department and the US Genocide Justice Act passed by the Congress and signed to law by Bill Clinton in 1994. How to exist. Right. And you were involved from the very beginning? Yes. The founding director. What is an aspect of DCCAM's work that you feel has been particularly beneficial for Cambodia's process of recovering from the Khmer Rouge era? I think that it's becoming a public matter that everyone have a sense of ownership of their particular history and people talk about this publicly. For me, it's a culture of debate which is renewed to Cambodia that people can say things without fear or intimidation and also becoming a foundation of other matter that matter to them. They are facing today. Before, it started that Khmer Rouge was a political issue. It's belong to the states. It belongs to politicians. But yet, we are the people who suffer. It's just like here nobody talks about this or here nobody talks about this. But now, even young people, the two ladies just can't really talk about this and we talk about this. I'm with hundreds of laws to then do a dissertation that research everybody. I think that by doing this, you free them from the past horror and then they determine their future. In the process itself, we advocate such a tribe. You know education and other things so that people can take care of themselves. As an organisation, DC CAM has known great success for outreach for campaigning for the establishment of the ECCC for having such a diverse range of projects. But if you could describe what would be the key aspect of DC CAM's success as an organisation, perhaps over other groups in Cambodia or in other parts of the world. Like which one? Yeah. I would say documentation to be honest. Because it was our strengths. It was something that no one can change or modifies or eliminate. It's there. And that provides a solid foundation for us to define what happened and why we are here now and what we are going to do in the future. It's a black location. And it was our prime project and we still continue to receive documents even today. I think documentation also means knowledge, means information that a lot of people don't value. It's significant. For example, like this one, just a piece of music. It's a documentation. I think documentation is the key. When I speak, when I advocate things, it's based on documentation. And I would not be afraid to say anything if I have documents in hand. When I say documentation, we also refer to the primary sources. So this is one of the DCCAN's ambition, is to only collect things that have not been seen or used by others. Or to conduct interview with someone who has never been spoken with others. So that's our ambition. So if I see things like X-rays at the archive, at those lines in the sign museum, I don't go and collect from there. I look for something that's unknown. For me, I want to bring something new to the society. Because it already exists, there's no point. For example, I think from China, things like that. I think that is the power of information. How have you found the technical skills or the people that you needed to help you do this work over the years? You know, we met David Shaffer yesterday. I have a friend, Moom Zani, he's Burmese. Zani and I are the same age, but he's sort of Burmese, focused on Horinga's issue. And it's very funny, David Shaffer said to me, we had breakfast together. Oh, I met Yook Chang of Burma. But this Yook Chang Cambodia is a bit more nicer. I think it's... I opened up for all... I'm open because I don't believe that I'm the only one, or the only one who knows everything. So I seek help because I don't know... I'm an anthropologist, I must say, characters. So I open up to all aspects because I see the Khmer rule of a country, and it has so many things, and requires special skills. So I have to open up to professionals. I think basically how I work with them is based on, perhaps, relationship. You know, relationship. So that's good also, that's really something that I have or I need to have to work with others. How do I work with the ambassador? How do I work with perpetrator? How do I work with the victim? How do I work with psychiatrist? How do I work with Korean? How do I work with Thai? And I think that is needed. And that's what I also train myself, for example. I have to read a lot of books about Burma or Korea before I go to Korea, things like that. So I have to understand those countries. So that is that every day I have to learn something. It's either why I can't reach out to others. So that's something that perhaps is based on personality, I don't know. You honestly never thought of that. I think you do have a gift for finding the right people. And caring for them as well. They stay with you. Yeah, I told myself you should go away because they say too long. I mean, I delay, they were with me, they were 18 and now she's 30 something. Maybe the kid is still around. But I think that maybe that I don't have, maybe it's something that has been wrong. People think that I want something but I don't. Because the world is so big. I just enjoy doing this. But others may think that I want something else. So when people are with me and with me, then they realize that I don't need anything. I like to give, I don't like to take away. So that's why they enjoy perhaps looking in the right or they keep staying. I don't know. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So obviously DCCAM has been extremely important to the work of the ECCC. Yes. We have heard over the course of our visit a bit about your experience working with the ECCC. But I wondered if you could just, for people listening again, what has been the experience of working with the ECCC over the past, what, 10 years? More than 10 years. What have been some of the challenges and successes of that? Well, you know, I support ECCC wholeheartedly. Yes. On day one we advocated, we supported. But I don't mean that I support it naively. You know, things can go wrong. Yeah. It can go to a different direction. I support it, but I also point out if we go to the wrong direction. For example, when I met David Shaffer yesterday, I briefed him. And I told him that we always try to bring civil party to be part of our project in the field. So that their voice continues to be heard. And usually we requested or we were informed by the civil party lawyer that we should invite the civil party where that we are working. For example, if I go to one of the provinces, like Pravegan, we should invite people from Pravegan. So I did. So when, but, and I start to observe, you know, so when you, when you invite someone, it's the same village who are now civil party. And when you have a program for everybody in the same village, and they both met. So I observe the truth. But for me, they are the same village. But once a teacher wants a civil party. So when I observe, I told David Shaffer, I feel like very sad because the audience, not just only me, feel that the group who closely associated with the tribunal has more, has been indoctrinated. They always say, think that it's not like, they no longer the person in the village. Years ago. And people said, I wonder why did you became like that? And I told David Shaffer, I feel like they've been indoctrinated. They've been so tainted by the legal suppression from PCC. For me, that's, it's, it's, it's harming then helping them. So, you know, that's a challenge. So I do, because I'm not working with the civil party, I don't know their system, but the lawyer, the one who sort of worked with them and explained to them things. But this is the result. So I told David Shaffer, I feel very uncomfortable. We also discussed about the case file. You know, we supply more than half a million. We supply anything. But sometimes the request is not necessary. It's not about the case file, but about the archive. For example, we have a lot of interior we conducted a decade ago. And we also transcribed it. And we provide 100% transcript to the court. And we understand sometimes they defend, challenge the transcript. And they want to hear the voice that people at the interview, right? We have no problem to tell us the name. We give you the voice. But when you don't have any reason, you want all voice. Right. Of hundred and thousand names, then it's not about the case file. But why do you need this? The court always use legal justification. We need to hear everything. But can you hear because you're not convenient to hear from Germany? Can you hear all the Khmer languages? If you want to hear all the Khmer languages, you need what? 20 staff? Half a million just dollars? Things like that? Is it important? And that's the challenge too. So because I'm not the person who, I'm the case manager, but sometimes the question about why? Why do you need the whole cassette tape of a hundred thousand of hours where you need to hear 10? And just give us 10? Then we give you 10. Take 10 minutes. So that's the challenge too. Other challenges, I think it's really easy to see those are the two challenges, the office of court, the rest of the judge and the victim support unit. I mean, you know, and I think that because of the, perhaps it's because of the nature of the civil party, it's a civil law. It's not a common law. But I have those challenging and dealing with the unit that seems to be implementing the civil law because they look at ECC as a genocide trial. We lost two million in life, but we have four or five million who have survived. Some of those also are perpetrators to tell their story. If you want everyone to tell a story, a civil party, it takes 70 years. You know? So I think that perhaps those are the challenges that I have with those two units. And otherwise, I think that the court's working very hard, you know, the office of the co-prosecutors to defend the judges. The old unit, everybody's there. The people's. Those are, I think those are the two. If I have the power in any negotiation for the future tribe, you know, I would never recommand two units. One is office of co-investigation giant and second is to become support unit. I mean, the civil law, six times the civil party, I would not. Because I think that with this experience that I have learned, the purpose of the tribe, you know, is not only to provide the foundation so that people can build upon, but also to free them from the past. You don't want to cage them with all these legalities. You have to say certain things. You can say whatever you like. So just out of curiosity, what is the victim support program? I think maybe in other contexts, the ICTY called it an outreach program. It's different. It's a different thing. Has the ECCC had an outreach program as well? They do have the public affair, they do outreach with us. Their office is fine, outreach is fine. What kind of activities do they? Well, we started, we started from beginning and then we leave it to them to carry on. What we did from beginning, we bring people from the most remote area to the city and meet with the international side and the Cambodian side and visit a few. Our program is very thorough, for example. It's funded by particularly funds from the U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy. The program was like, we bused five people here to provide them orientation of the history of the court, speaking with, we wanted to meet with the official like member of parliament, people who are involved with the drug and chemical law, explained by health law come to exist. And then they would also meet with international sides and Cambodian side and they can ask questions directly. And then we also warm them up by having them visit a few killing sites and talk to others. We also go with psychiatrists to making sure, because among them, some were perpetrators, some were victims, making sure that they agreed to sit in the same bus. So it's a lot of proceeding. We have a performing unforgiveness drama for them to really try to understand between the court and justice on the ground. So we have a drama for them. And then, you know, so, and the idea is they become the messenger for us to share with other neighbor. So the numbers to multiply, 500, 1,000, still a lot, not go to like most also a million. Oh, wow. Yeah. Then when the court started to pick it up and carry on, the outreach also expanded to other target group, like the court go to high school, we go to teacher, we go to Islam groups, which I mean Cambodian, everybody know the tribunal. The outreach was, I think the outreach was more success. Right. Everybody know. Yeah. Because everybody know, you empower them to decide the future of the court. And, you know, people are saying you will hate the court, people are saying you will like the court. For me, that's a good sign. Because they have, they have been empowered, empowered, and to determine whether they like it or not. And that is, for me, it's all about the process. Yeah. All about it. So I focus on the process. And I don't, for me, if the court decide that Cambodian is not guilty, I can guarantee you. The whole country will say they guilty. So we had to vote it. So why bother? Yeah. So we, but we might respect the rule of law. We might respect the court proceeding. So we sort of, an educational for our public, for people to take this seriously. And it's the process itself that people can benefit. So I focus only on the process. Yeah. For me, without people participation, the verdict is meaningless. Mm-hmm. So I focus on that. Because the court focus on the verdict. And why should I focus on the verdict? But I'm not a court. So I find, I choose my battle. Yes. So I choose the process. Yeah. Yeah. So there are a number of countries around different parts of the world, including work groups working on North Korean issues who are thinking about the future. And there is no court yet. There's no tribunal yet. You've already shared with us a little bit about, you know, don't hand over your primary documents. Keep your documents. I mean, what are some of the, what are like one or two of the, the most important things that groups should be thinking about in the future when working with tribunals or international courts? Well, you know, I support the court, but the court won't be here the rest of their life. That's why the way we envision our work is not just only for justice, but also for memory. Because we also look at memory, which we translate as education of genocide as a complimentary of justice to the court. So we have defined our future beyond the court, but we support the court at all costs. For that reason, you have to think about what's in it for your children, for your future when the court is, when the court is over. So one thing that comes to our mind is that record that the archive that had to be here for our children and many generations to come to learn, learning, understanding also justice. So I define that. So when come to documentation, I think that, that anything's here belong to the state, belong to the people of Cambodia, and you have the nobles responsibility to protect it. And when you look at all of the international court proceeding on history, anything that you get to develop with the court. And the court, when they no longer in here, they take away with it. I look at Bosnia, ICT, Bahia, Iraq, and I have learned, I have learned from international experience that to define the local approach. So I also study whether that when is the right time, when is really needed for the court to really have the original on case file and why. So as long as you are sincere, provide all this material with proper legal support like chain of custody, authentication, you sign, you testify, that should be sufficient. And secondly it's that all the original are the treasure, and they fragile. You pass it on among all these many hands. Yes. You know, even when you go to the court, they don't use it anyway, they photocopy. Yeah. You know? So then reach what kind of copy that would qualify the material for them to use to be acceptable by the defendant. So all of this it's a study behind a piece of documentation. And I discovered that they don't need original, which is not belong to the people of Cambodia. Yeah. Yeah. And you give to them, when I say the court, the court consists of what? 100 kinds of people from around the world. Each of them have bring in their own country, expertise and understanding differently. Yeah. And that create the create the irresponsible, create the a room that thing can be can be missing, can be damaged, can be disappeared, or many things. It happened. Yeah. It happened. Yeah. So that's why I never give any original, this is all original, it's on my desk. But if the court did it, we copy for them immediately. Yeah. And in any minute, and I would sign and testify that it's fair, nothing but the whole truth is from the original file. You can have it now. You know? So because, because it's not belong to me, it belong to the 15 million Cambodian. Yeah. So that's the kind of, but come to the archive. I think that to understand that all the organization had to understand it all domestic archive law, international law, and also the how the court handlings the evidence. It's a piece of knowledge and so you need to be that best on those local content. Yeah. So I never gave them to any court. Second question, I forgot. Yeah. No, it was just, just pieces of advice for documentation groups that are looking to the future. So obviously one is protecting your documents and keeping safe. Yes. It's one thing. And I think secondly also that you, you have to know yourself that you're not a court of law, you're not a prosecutor. If you act as a prosecutor, if you try to determine which one is a piece of evidence, then you don't do your job. Yeah. You have to, you have to delete, you have to, you only can provide preliminary information and understanding and determine what happened in the past, but you are no position to determine which one is, is or is not a piece of evidence. If you try to do that, then you're not a court of law and you actually eliminate the information that you are collecting. You have to respect the court normally reward and let the court act as it is. Yeah. But yet also you have to refine your position that you are not serving the court, you work with the court. Yes. You're not serving the court. And that's the support of the relationship between the civil society and the organization. That's very important. Yeah, yeah. That's very, very helpful advice. As far as the, the verdicts on the cases before the ECC have gone so far, what has been the national reception or the national opinion about the verdicts that have been reached so far? Has it been a satisfactory process for people? Well, you know, verdicts define differently between the court and the people. Right. The same thing, the meaning of justice. I'll give you one example. When the court started it, I think one leader was giving amnesty by the king. And the king was around. The king was, had not yet passed away then. And people, even though the court set up, people don't believe that the court can function. The court won't be, won't have a fair trial because this person was giving patent by the king or amnesty by the king so that is a joke. So people all care the court exists so people just move on. The day that this person got arrested, even a lady selling food on the market feel that justice being done. And she moved on. That's a verdict. Her verdict is the day, the person, the day they were believed would be arrested. So when we are arrested, it becomes a verdict for a lot of people in the country. That's a verdict. Secondly, that, for example, when, I think in 2014, when the two, when the verdict announced that the two will be imprisoned for a lifetime, they move on. Yeah. They move on. So sometimes, you know, people have defined a minimum verdict differently. Yeah. But then some people say, oh, we have to punish them more. But most of, those are the small majority of a small group of people said, oh, well, you know, they, because of them, that's why I lost my sister. Then this is not enough. Kill them, or chop them, or hang them, or punish them severely. You know, it's always such a reaction, but I think that when you also integrate in your work in terms of, like, sociologists, anthropologists, then you can understand better why people say things like that. It's out of frustration. Yeah. Anger. So, you know, emotional reaction to it. So, when there is a public announcement aside, that it's one of the most, that is the, you can feel that the power of verdict that reach out to all level. And you can feel a sense of, of satisfaction, and that means justice. When you feel more mental satisfaction, that's justice. But then, a few years later, that people heard that there's another cases, but we're the same person. Yeah. And that because the court argued that the punishment, the verdict for the crime that they committed against 12,000 people, it's not sufficient unless we also punish them for the crime and get, commit against 18,000 people. 6,000 different. Yeah. But for people, it's no different. Yeah. Because we lost 2 million life. Yeah. It's not 6,000 different. But the court is strict to the, to the degree of the punishment, even though 6,000 life, I mean, each life is significant, each life is important. Yes. But it comes to number of differences between 12,000 to 18,000. For the people, it's confusing. Yes. Can you think about 2 million? Yes. So for them, it started to question the verdict. Hmm. Like, why so? What is the, what is the really the interest? Because the way people understand is different from the lawyer, a lawyer you understand it. Yeah. And then if you don't have proper communication between the court and the people, you create this. It's not happening here. Yeah. Yeah. So, I think that because also people have been so open because it's such a cheap public debate. So I don't look at this as a negative thing. That's just like people see themselves also, people see themselves as a witness, as a judge, as a prosecutor. Hmm. And the fed is interesting to see how they challenge the court of law. Hmm. And for me, it's, I'm happy. I always take people aside because I'm happy when the legislature argue with, with prosecutors or investigators, I'm very happy because I think that the court had to understand, had to understand not just the crime, but who suffer by the crime. Yes. And for me, that's extremely important. For me, that is the real court. When I see people that, you know, I told you a story a long time ago when we first met, I think, about international investigator went to look for a witness and refused to ask anybody because they wanted to keep this confidential. Yeah. And they went to a local shop and this lady keep asking them, what are you looking for? I saw you can't drive around for so many time. Hmm. They say they can't tell because it's confidential. And finally, finally, there's about to leave the restaurant and return to the court without, without any information from the people they was looking for. They told the lady, the lady keep pressure on the international investigator chat. So finally, they tell, they told her a name of the person, a first name. Uh-huh. And it appeared to be her. Oh. They weren't looking for. They said, why don't you tell me? I can't tell you anything. And you know what? They blame the woman and say that, why don't you tell us that you're one of the witness. He said, well, I lived here a long time ago. Where were you? Right. You know? So for me, it inspired me. That, that, sometimes we from the international group, from the books, from, we are people who report. Sometimes we, we sort of, uh, misknit from the reality. Yes. And my job, DC chemists about the reality. So for me, I would sign with her. Yeah. You know? I, I would do anything to support her because she was right. Yeah. And, and it's just like, this is one of the example. Yeah. Uh, she said, look, you know, I'm here since 79. I lost my husband, I lost my children. I was looking for you to bring this process of justice for a long time. I heard of it. I just want to support you. You tell me, I tell you everything. You tell me my name. I would tell you the whole world of what happened. Yeah. And you don't have to be a secret. In my village, you don't have to be a secret about the community about the killing field. Right. So for me, had the court have this kind of understanding, they will bring more witnesses. They will bring more evidence. They will bring more support. And they will have, they would have a better trial and can move faster. So for me, again, without people participation, the process is meaningless and can drag longer, can cost more. Yes. People engagement. Yeah. And that is the job of the civil society. Yeah. Not to be a court, but to be a woman, the freedom lady. Yeah. And you should look with the court as an equal partner. Yeah. Yeah. And a very, very important advice, I think, for civil society anyway, dealing with human rights abuses. And in that area, one thing that I've noticed since visiting DC CAM and the gallery, is the different methods you have for, I guess, stress relief or balancing the very grim work of having to read and hear very difficult testimonies. What are some of the strategies that you use to balance out the darkness? Yeah. Well, you know, you need the beauty to understand the darkness. And as you can see, I think you would, I overheard your impression when you walk into my office, the glass door. Yes. You can see, I can see Sue all the way there. Yeah. And she can see all the way through the door, you know, to see in front of us. Yeah. You know? Yeah. So I think that transparent, not just on the physical working environment, but also funding, money, process, have to be transparent. Mmm. And you can add collectiveness among yourself. So when people know something, and they don't feel vulnerable, that people also know something, they share. Mm-hmm. So it's, it minimizes the stress. You're not only one who read all these testimonies, because you talk to people, you talk to colleagues, you turn around and people are just next to you, but you come to me. And secondly also, we always have staff meetings regularly every Friday. Mmm. And every Friday, people can talk about anything. Sometimes we talk about Aristotle, or Socrates, we talk about the current situation in Cambodia. Mmm. We talk about the rainy season. We talk about fishing, the police are everywhere. Mmm. We have some snag together, and we also, sometimes we see movie. Mmm-hmm. But one of the priority of the film is about the Khmer rule, but sometimes it's about, you know, Zhang Ziji, my favorite actress from China. Ha ha ha. You know, sometimes great movies. Yeah. So it seems like that. Yeah. I think because everything is like, it's like on every piece of things around you. Yeah. Evident not just only a black at the crime scene, but everything can be a piece of beautiful painting. It can be a conversation in a, in a, in a, in a Disney Land movie. Ha. Evident can be in the, on the logo of the soda that you drink. Yeah. You know, Evident can be a vegetable that you brought from the market, someone who sold you the vegetable. Yeah. So I train my staff to look at circumstantial of Evident, not Evident as Evident. Mmm-hmm. So anything can be Evident, the environment, location, time, vegetable, food, painting, watches, and anything. So those are in the film, those are in the performance, those are the gallery, those around you. Mmm-hmm. And secondly, this is a joke. We don't support starvation in Cambodia, so we eat. Ha-ha-ha. You know, we all make food. Yeah. And we eat, we don't use donor money, donor money to buy food, huh? Mmm-hmm. We, all of us write books and we sell books and we use the money for our own entertainment. Right. So, each one of my staff write books and publish it and we sell it. Mmm-hmm. And we make quite a lot of money every quarterly. Sometimes we make up to $3,000 from selling our products in calendar. And we use that money for food. Sometimes we travel to get everyone to unknown place or known tourist place to see temple, you know, to see the river, to the ocean. Mmm-hmm. So, we support ourselves and we come together. And another thing is that all the staff here are required to learn and to go to school. Mmm-hmm. As far as you have one master, some of them require to get two masters or PhD. So, knowledge also is important. If you have better knowledge and the majority of your staff have good knowledge, it helps those who have less. And here, the majority of my staff get at least two master and one PhD. Wow. So, they hear they help the other who's smaller. Like the two young ladies just came to me she just graduated. Mmm-hmm. But I won't feel worried that she would have stress because a PhD they bring me around so they help support the younger. Mmm-hmm. So we support one to another in terms of knowledge, in terms of spirit. Mmm-hmm. Things like that. So, and as you can see that in this office there's no image of crime. Yes. Yes. At all. Mmm-hmm. At all. But instead I make the office like a museum. It is like a museum. And we change every four months. If you come in the next one today it would be a different painting on the wall. Right. Some of my staff hate contemporary painting because they don't understand. But I told them you train you are trained to appreciate even there's a piece of that painting. If you look at when you look at a painting you don't like try to find something you like the color, the shape the image of it or something. It takes time to train Cambodian to appreciate contemporary. Because I think contemporary fit just like fiction is healing. Mmm-hmm. If you have like a traditional I think that it's always tell you what it is. But with contemporary it made you think. Yeah. It made you respond. It might be difficult in the first place but when you train then you you become very active proactive and you respond. And then also a skill. Yeah. So I could always I also makes me traditional because I know there are some of them don't like contemporary. But now they get used to it and they only get used to it when they go to other people's office and they turn home and say oh, you know the office that we visit is still painting at all. Mmm-hmm. So that thing you know it's something a little small thing. Mmm-hmm. And then my staff also appreciate the color. Yeah. But as you notice that in the office everyone requires to be a white shirt. I've noticed that I was going to ask you actually. What is that behind that? Well, you know because also it creates equality. Right. Right. Because you know in terms of refining in terms of knowledge in terms of many things. Mmm-hmm. But on Friday they can have free dress. Okay. On Friday. Yeah. You know because if I make more money than my staff I would buy proper shoe, better shoe, better brands. Mmm-hmm. You know, but my staff who make less than me who may buy like a sample the shoe is not so nice. Mmm-hmm. But you know people and most of my staff are young people. Yeah. And being a young person you want something for two for yourself. Yeah. But if people around you look better than you then you feel a little bit down. Yeah. So if you want my friend same thing. Well, everyone looks very smart and kind of. Yeah. So and also I think that it's you always buy like four white shirt a year. Right. And you don't have to worry about to get any fancy trend to come to the world. We just wear the sweatshirt. It's easy. No stress. Just come. That's what Mark Zuckerberg Facebook founder he wears the same gray shirt every day. So I wear this all the time. Yeah. You know, I change a few things but it's the same color. Yeah. And it's very convenient. Mmm-hmm. But the staff also are trained doesn't matter who you are. Even those, it's just a messenger or people deliver a letter to the office. All staff are required to give them high respect. Mmm-hmm. Because we look at them as someone who are either children or family of the survivor. Mmm-hmm. We don't prejudice anybody. And for the international people they are trained to look at to look at them as they also humanity immunity. And genocide there's not again anyone they genocide there's not discriminate they kill everybody. So when we look at our visitor we also look at them as part of the humanity. So we had to so I think all these things small training but I think that I told us not to do despite more by doing that. I mean nothing around just agree people properly and I will work for the survivor. If they're here you have to they are our boss. Yeah. I'm not your boss. The boss is people who are coming and looking for information. People are coming who are looking for the loss of their loved one. They may be poor they may be a farmer but they are our boss. So show respect to them. Yeah. So those are sort of morality that that we talk about ourselves. And here people don't use Facebook. Yeah. Don't use Twitter. Yeah. If they do ice cream. Yeah. They don't use it. They don't use it. Yeah. So I always every day I send information to them about social media tech. They're all things that surround their life and sometimes we discuss social and peer pressure so they are aware. So these are part of our start meeting discussion. Some very good lessons there. The last question I wanted to ask was about DCCAM's future and the long-term legacy not just of the documentation but of all the work behind you is this amazing blueprint of Zahid Hadid architect's drawing of the Sloop Writh Yes. Institute. Yes. Could you tell us a little bit about that and what your hopes are for the future? You know if you don't have a home you don't have a family and I prefer to family to don't have passed away. They have no home. You know we don't know where they are but so that like you're living with the death but they also have people left behind their children they are their brothers and sisters so I want to have a home where all the children that can can you know I mean it's a renewal but you can you cannot renewal also require to understand the past so I want all these young people to know that this is their home this is their family so it's the idea of a Slippery Institute is a place like people can call home but it's a school campus and it's the idea that renewal requires understanding of the past on a daily basis so you can move so Slippery Institute is a school campus that designed for Cambodia high school and university and everybody that can give you love to them so that that this can never be forgotten but it's not about living with the past you know we cannot escape the past it's about defining the future and that's why I want a place to be beautiful so I studied museum around the world and I have discovered that all the museums are designed by men and I determined that in all of the museums always looked at some darkness something really horrible and I think I don't want my sister to be in such a place surely have died horribly and millions have died terribly already I don't want them to be remembered in such a place I want them to be remembered in such a beautiful place I want to go to a palace and remember things of my sister and all Cambodians should be like that so it was to be very beautiful designed by a woman and Sahar is the only woman in the world they can do this that's why the designs are so beautiful because they want people to go there and think of them who have died in a beautiful place and that's an honor I don't want to go to those lounging I didn't remember my sister to see the blood to remember my sister to see the scar to remember my sister I think that we have suffers enough and that it's important to preserve but it's not about remembering so I define the remembrance in a very different way and I want to challenge the new century to the world from a place designed by a woman can we remember those who have died in a beautiful place why do we have to go to a crime site to remember of those who have died terribly in the past so for me I still open up for better for the other approach but for now when I look around in the last century of having a museum run and function it's all about the darkness so I want to bring a different one with an aspect and Zaha helped me to do this we discussed this and they want also to present the woman's role that's why the building is very feminine and feminine and just culture and environment because I think that that we also have to define our future rather than and had to also prepare our future we have to believe in the future to be simply put and that's why it had to be that way but I thought of this even from day one the GC camp exists not based on a written policy based on question I asked myself what if no tribe you know what am I doing here so how I knew the GC camp on a daily basis so I answer myself if there's no court then at least my staff have gone to school the resource is there and even carry on what if no tribe you know it must be a place that we can continue to talk about this to talk about this yeah because crime never stopped what if tribe you know it would stop at certain cases what should I do so I keep doing that yeah that becoming my strategic planning at AVE 3 4 5 year I knew that AVE 2 3 5 year so I had designed this strategy based on question and when I asked question I asked my staff when the ACC started it the UN approach just to be part of the the UN part of the court as evidence a section so I talked to my staff and I told my staff no I don't want it and I explained why because it would be a short life for us if we part of the UN then what happened if this court is finished yeah yes I will home you don't have a home I should be continue to rent the house so I decide not to be part of the UN to be independent but promise to UN that we will support the court wholeheartedly imagine if we part of the court today what is it going to be like it's nothing nothing will be left behind for other people so there's a lot of battle with the question and answer so I had to ask my staff because it was very exciting if you be part of the UN you get more high salary you have a social status but it's a short term it's a short vision so all of this I already discussed with my staff so by talking to your staff all the time openly you form you develop a process of democracy you listen and you disagree you explain you know two staff I think two or three staff failed they didn't finish school we're not all success we're human we made mistakes few staff didn't make it we have a few staff that didn't make didn't finish school properly we made 29 mistakes I can't mistake that we made I brought up I wrote a paper about that actually the mistake that we made so sometimes you have to be re-evaluate yourself and admit this is not a lesson that is a mistake that you made so when you start to accept that I think the staff also inspired but you can avoid or having a few would fail so we have staff that failed who didn't see it but when they return they return stronger they return like a big PHD a big work I don't want to just show to the two ladies it's a big work by one of my staff who was a professor in the state and wrote a book about China-Vietnam relation it's a big work but he at first he had short sights he didn't think that the quote will ever be established despite so I have staff who ventured to fear and he turned with a question like you know people are now shortage of food and they have land wrapping issue and we go to talk to them about the thing that we don't even know that when the quote will be established so it got very difficult but when you create this kind of environment they tell you so you find a new strategy so strategy must be flexible and keep modifying all the time we will shuffle last night look at us as a gaming when we started it what for us is modification of strategy and we will reach and we have reached our goal so your staff may be small may be a volunteer but they are the greatest source it's your strength so I have always depend on them you see the painting downstairs yes the image of a kite flying in our proverb there's a saying that the kite cannot fly without the wind and the kite is me and the wind is my staff so I keep telling my staff you are the wind I'm the kite if no wind and the kite will fall down so all those little things that generate from the old culture the old content I think the key to success is understanding your staff understanding the content and honest if you make a mistake so that's how I run the VC camp so far no problem so far so good so far very good so that's how I run the VC camp well that brings me to the end of my questions but thank you so much for your time well thank you for asking