My dear Kacvey,

First and foremost, please do not get mixed up with “The Sermon” by Jimmy Smith.

Secondly, do you recall the name “Raymond Poulidor” aka “The Eternal Second” in “Tour de France” of the 60s?

Well, it looks like the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk also has an “eternal second”, politically speaking. You would ask who would that be?

Ah, the 1st Vice, indeed: Vice among the rescuers, and Vice at the NA.

Because of being a Vice, Fortune has not been on his side, as summons has been sent to him by the Municipal Court judge to appear before him on Wednesday 8 April. He must by now have a stack of summonses on his desk with all that has happened in his life.

Since the issue is between the justice system represented by the judge and him, let leave the matter to his lawyers and the judge to face and battle each other.

Nonetheless, let see the other side of the coin, if the coin has only 2 sides, with these questions for ourselves:

1. If the judge issued the summons to the 1st Vice, did he or did he not know that the 1st Vice has parliamentary immunity?

2. If he did not know, is he really a judge or a man of the laws?

3. If he did know, why did he then issue the summons? Did he take the laws into his own hand or on the instructions of some higher authorities who consider that the laws are just a toilet seat?

4. Who then, in Cambodia, is summum bonum?

5. For the 1st Vice, if he is “summonable”, how does he define himself in front of his constituency?

6. Can he then summon up his inspiration and his supporters and co-parliamentarians to challenge the judge’s summons?

7. Is this so-called “parliamentary immunity” a true and valid stuff or just a blah blah blah to circumstantially benefit a group of irresponsible people to evade justice?

Kacvey, what would your students at law school respond if these questions are part of their weekly quiz?