PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 24, 1997
Declares that a primary objective of U.S. policy toward Cambodia should be the establishment of an international tribunal for the prosecution of those responsible for the Cambodia genocide. Calls upon: (1) the President, in compliance with the Cambodian Genocide Justice Act and the objectives stated above, to immediately deem it appropriate to encourage the establishment of an international criminal tribunal for the prosecution of members of the Khmer Rouge; (2) the United States, in further compliance with such Act, to support efforts to bring such members, including Pol Pot (former leader of the Khmer Rouge) to justice for their crimes against humanity before an international tribunal and to provide that tribunal with any information available on such members' involvement in the Cambodia genocide; and (3) the Secretary of State to encourage all Member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the People's Republic of China, Japan, and other interested countries to support such a tribunal.
People & committees
Sen. Roth Jr., William V. [R-DE] · R–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9898)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.Res.124 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.Res.124 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.Res.124 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.Res.124 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.