Victims’ participation at the ECCC is unprecedented for internationalized criminal trials. The UN and the Royal Government of Cambodia had, however, not clearly envisaged victims’ participation during their negotiations. Moreover, the ECCC judges have progressively adopted an increasingly restrictive interpretation of civil parties’ rights. Both the academic and ‘expert’ literature on Transitional Justice in Cambodia explain the introduction of victims’ participation at the ECCC through the mere existence of a French inherited civil law system. While this indeed judicially enabled victims’ participation, it is an insufficient explanation, especially in light of the ulterior limitations to victims’ participation. The different actors at the origin of victims’ participation at the ECCC and its evolution need further analysis. The paper thus attempts to fill this gap in literature by identifying the role of local and international NGOs and by highlighting their interests, the international context of their advocacy and the local interpretation of internationally induced norms. The paper thereby presents a case study of norm diffusion within the field of Transitional Justice. Norm transmission in this case is not linear as it is complicated by the ulterior restriction of civil parties’ rights at the ECCC. It is thus necessary to address the representations of victims and conceptions of justice of the actors involved in order to identify factors leading to restrictions of victims’ participation. Besides legal conservatism and differences in cultures of law amongst ECCC judicial officials, the paper examines the fear of victims’ participation and the representation of the “good victim” –a victim who is able to generalise one’s suffering and is reasonable both in her claims and her use of emotion. In light of recent developments at the ECCC, the paper finally asks whether victims’ participation has become a mere tool of legitimation instead of being designed to genuinely meet victims’ needs.
