The key findings and analysis of artistic freedom in Indonesia from the Southeast Asia Artistic Freedom RADAR, 2023 – 2024.
Introduction
Same same but different – Cambodia’s government reshuffle brings few surprises
The 2023 General Elections in Cambodia witnessed a change in Prime Minister after 38 years – with power passing to his eldest son. While the government reshuffle also saw many other new and younger faces take office, the Minister of Culture and Fine Arts, Phoeurng Sackona, remained steady in her position. The Ministry of Information, which after the culture ministry was involved in the second highest number of artistic freedom challenges and violations between 2010-2022, had a change in leadership, however. Media freedom had already been in sharp decline since 2017, which was further consolidated by the closure of the Cambodian Voice of Democracy outlet in 2023 and the arrest of freelance journalist Mech Dara on charges of alleged misinformation in 2024. While the economic outlook in 2023 and 2024 was mostly favourable, Cambodia’s tourism industry had not yet recovered to pre-COVID levels. The number of Chinese visitors in particular remained low. This might in part be due to the mushrooming of large-scale human trafficking and cyber scam operations on Cambodian soil in recent years, reports of which might have scared potential Chinese visitors away for fear of being abducted and forced to work for free.
The institutionalisation of moral policing meets the awakening of public social justice
In 2023, the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts started a discussion to review the 2014 National Policy for Culture, inviting dozens of stakeholders to a public consultation. While independent cultural actors expressed their desire to be free to use contemporary forms and critical reflection in their art, an explicit call for artistic freedom was not made. 2023 and 2024 were also important years for the pioneering restitution of many looted heritage objects from Western museums and private collections, which the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts coordinated. This global effort and the national desire to have more tangible and intangible cultural heritage inscribed in UNESCO World Heritage lists has likely heightened the Ministry’s sensitivity toward perceived wrongdoings related to cultural heritage. This includes a directive to artisans not to use photographs of original (often repatriated) heritage objects to advertise their own replicas and an appeal not to include certain rituals in traditional wedding ceremonies as they are allegedly misplaced in this context.
Over the past decade, the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts has exercised moral policing of the arts, including through gatekeeping and reprimands. These ad hoc, but effective challenges to artistic freedom appear to have become institutionalised through a range of new policy documents. A new Artist Code of Conduct (PDF), announced in June 2024, carves a rather narrow space for artists to explore critical cultural expression whilst several other directives urge musicians and digital content creators to stay away from obscenities, nudity, or anything deemed immoral by traditional Cambodian cultural standards. What these cultural standards are remains unclear, potentially placing an undue burden on artists to self-censor themselves.
A different kind of policing is creating a bit of a counter-weight to these institutional measures, however. We already know that the Cambodian (online) public has immense power to trigger government institutions to react to perceived moral mishaps of artists, but the rallying and burgeoning micro-activism of audiences to support marginalised groups that were attacked in the cultural sphere is a new phenomenon. In two cases, online audiences managed to pressure artists that engaged in hate speech to write or record public apologies: a judge heckling a talent show participant through anti-LGBTQI+ comments and a rap duo mocking indigenous people in a song.
Not new, but certainly much more visible in recent years, are two other ‘civil society’ actors. First, there is the Khmer Artist Association with its new powerful President Mao Chamnan. President Mao is a former actress and married to the Chairman of Cambodia’s mega-conglomerate Royal Group. Since becoming president, she has started a social media charm offensive whilst also telling artists to tone down their art if it doesn’t fit into the polished image of the association. And then there is the Union of Youth Federations of Cambodia (UYFC) – the de-facto youth wing of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party – which is increasingly using arts and culture for the mobilisation of youth around narratives of patriotism and heritage during attractive large-scale events such as Celebrate Cambodia, Angkor Sankranta, and various cultural world record attempts. While these developments cannot quite be considered polarisation, it is certainly a noteworthy signal that different parts of society increasingly recognise the power of arts and culture to further their own agendas.
ARTISTIC FREEDOM IN CAMBODIA 2023-24
Cambodia records 13 cases of artistic freedom violations in 2023 and 2024
2023 saw 8 violations and 2024 experienced 5 cases. These numbers are slightly above the 14-year average of 3.4 recorded cases per year in Cambodia. However, this does not necessarily mean that these years did have more actual cases but might be a result of live monitoring cases as they were happening (2023-2024) as opposed to mostly media-based retroactive data collection (2010-2022).
If your art is available to a mass audience, you are more likely to be targeted
With two cases each in 2023 and 2024, music continues to be the most-targeted art form in Cambodia. While the music cases are all very different in theme and genre (from pop to rap to metal), most have their availability through mass distribution in common. Being available to an online audience has likely also played a major role in Cambodia recording the only two cases of targeted interactive media across Southeast Asia – these were online content creators.
A proactive public triggers a reactive government – mostly online
Cambodia continues the trend of state institutions engaging in violations of artistic freedom mostly in a reactive manner. In the majority of cases, a public outcry (often online) about a certain artwork or artist reaches the ministries that then appear to feel the need to react to this public sentiment (Meas Soksopheas’ “The Death of the Husband, Jayavarman VII”, Em Riem’s social media posts). These ministerial reactions often also take place online – on official Facebook pages and Telegram channels – as a demonstration of action. The cycle continues with the targeted artists often responding online too, by removing the content in question and/or by issuing a public apology. While in previous years, the Ministry of Information had played a strong secondary role in policing artistic expressions, in 2023 and 2024, the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts (including APSARA Authority, the agency in charge of the Angkor Archaeological Park) has solidified its role as the main state agent to challenge artistic freedom.
In contrast to the pattern of online complaints, reprimands and apology, if an artwork is perceived to be of sensitive political nature (Blood Workers, Home and Life exhibition), law enforcement regularly gets involved.
To be un-Cambodian is the most dangerous label you can be awarded
As mentioned, moral policing in various forms and intensities continues to be the number one reason for an artwork or artist to be targeted. This might include wrong dancing at a wedding ceremony, wearing the wrong outfit (Em Riem), or celebrating the wrong festival in the wrong country (Kong Chansreymom). Most often these cases of moral policing are targeted at women and non-binary artists. Ranking at second place, fake news and misinformation are a common accusation by the government, used in conjunction with other reasons such as historical misrepresentation. While politics was the third most recorded reason for authorities to target an artwork, artist or presenter, the 2023 General Elections do not seem to have been a main driver of increased scrutiny beyond the general election year jitteriness.
Interestingly, a significant number of cases targeted by state agents include a foreign element (e.g. No More Bets, The Uncle Roger Show, Muay Thai at SEA Games 2023, Vietnamese TikToker Hứa Quốc Anh), usually because a foreign element is allegedly threatening Cambodian culture.
Public displays of solidarity with artists are becoming more common in Cambodia
We are observing a growing awareness for social justice among audiences. Increasingly, targeted artists and artworks receive public support for their art. However, this support often only materialises in relatively ‘safe’ online comments rather than coordinated campaigns. At the same time, we also witness growing public agency when it comes to initiating the first attack and openly supporting ministerial actions which restrict artistic freedom through comments on the ministries’ social media channels. For fear of retribution, the arts community often remains silent and artists are pressured into complying and appeasing their attackers.
Conclusion
Just as Cambodia’s political direction has not changed significantly after the 2023 election’s government handover to a new generation of leaders, the pattern of challenges to artistic freedom have not either. In Cambodia the trends of public protest triggering reactive state interventions, and the targeting of predominantly works that are widely accessible and have mass appeal, continues. The country’s foremost cultural mission to protect and preserve its heritage and traditions manifests in overbearing moral policing, disproportionately aimed at women and non-binary artists. Trying to counteract perceived foreign efforts to slander or misrepresent Cambodian culture is a growing phenomenon that should be monitored. This vigilance against foreign claims to Cambodian culture is perhaps an indicator of the increasing instrumentalisation of culture to build a national identity, even as it demonstrates a certain fragility of a cultural identity at the same time.
The active role the public plays protesting arts and cultural works raises questions about the public’s awareness of the concept of artistic freedom. Both the public and the government often emphasise artists’ role in promoting and preserving Cambodian heritage and traditions, situating them as mere tools in a larger national project. Interestingly, several artists who, according to our research criteria, had their rights to artistic freedom challenged or violated did not see it as such, or only acknowledged a violation after deeper reflection of what might constitute a violation of artistic freedom. Despite growing public awareness and support for targeted artists, artistic freedom as a fundamental right is conspicuously missing in many NGO manifestos advocating for other forms of freedom of expression in Cambodia, signalling that artistic freedom has not yet reached mainstream discussion.
While still troubling, the state of artistic freedom in Cambodia is not as restricted as in other countries in the region. Artists, while having to navigate income generation and artistic production in a restrictive political environment, still have spaces to create and showcase, often in smaller circles and offline spaces. Artists know that these spaces are relatively safe, yet self-censorship remains a major issue. This directly affects how audiences can engage with art, however, narrowing the availability to engage with critical art, especially outside of Phnom Penh. Whatever finds its way online and/or in mass distribution will always be scrutinised more widely and likely draw more attention from public and government watchdogs trying to protect a perceived ideal notion of Cambodian culture.
Limitations: The collected data for 2023 and 2024 is mostly based on media reporting and social media monitoring. We are aware of additional alleged behind-closed-doors challenges of artistic freedom in this period, however, these could not yet be verified and had to be excluded from the data collection for now.
About the author(s)
Kai Brennert is the Founder and Director of edgeandstory, a creative studio for data-driven insight into arts, culture, heritage, and the creative industries in the context of sustainable development. You might find him documenting violations of artistic freedom in Southeast Asia with ArtsEquator, evaluating the membership experience of the contemporary circus and outdoor arts network Circostrada, exploring the relationship between arts, peace, and security for the British Council, or co-designing a new work plan for culture and arts for ASEAN. Kai is from Germany, lives in Cambodia, and writes the cultural policy newsletter curious patterns.
Ath Manin
Manin is from Cambodia. With a degree in social work, Manin started her career in the Education sector as an academic support in the social work department. She then worked with an NGO running a campaign for advocacy for women’s rights, and gender equality. Currently, she works with CICADA as a consultant on data collection and her interests lie in learning more about the culture and art sector.
