As one of the longest-standing country mandates within the United Nations system of special procedures, the role of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia (formerly the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations for Human Rights in Cambodia) is useful in demonstrating some of the practical limitations faced by country-specific special rapporteurs and representatives. This paper considers the scope and breadth of the Cambodian special procedures mandates and whether grave or systematic human rights violations have been effectively responded to, or whether many of the problems identified by successive mandate-holders have persisted. The paper goes on to address some of the practical limitations faced by country-specific rapporteurs, particularly in poorly resourced post-conflict societies and considers how those constraints might impede the fulfilment of a special procedures mandate. The paper finds that, despite their significant role in assisting Cambodia to establish the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (the Khmer Rouge Tribunal) and develop local laws to respond to a number of human rights concerns, many of the recommendations of successive mandate-holders have not been implemented in a meaningful way, or at all. Although a failure to promptly implement certain recommendations is to be expected in a post-conflict society, in many instances critical recommendations have not been acted upon, despite technical assistance and repeated reporting. This paper argues that the refinement of the mandate and the prompt escalation of outstanding recommendations within the UN may properly support the role of those mandate-holders and progress the objective of protecting and promoting human rights.
