A U.S. Court has dismissed a civil case against Prime Minister Hun Sen’s eldest son, General Hun Manet.
The plaintiffs have vowed to pursue the case at the federal level.
The ruling on Monday, a copy of which was obtained by VOA on Tuesday, granted the “defendant Manet’s motion to dismiss and dismiss Manet from this action.”
A review has been scheduled for May 1.
The court on Thursday heard testimonies from two key witnesses and a police detective who were present at the La Lune restaurant on April 9 last year where a representative of the plaintiffs attempted to serve Manet the subpoena, but was attacked and thrown to the ground.
The witnesses were identified as San Kimhong and Nuon Khavy of California.
“We asked them a lot of questions, especially San Kimhong,” said Bo Uce, lawyer for plaintiffs. “We wanted to know his link to the bodyguard team and who attacked Paul Hayes. It’s normal that they denied [involvement] because a detective was in the room, too.”
Uce added that detective David Turnullo of Long Beach Police Department testified that a criminal case is still under investigation for the attack on Hayes, the process server.
The plaintiffs, Meach Sovannara and his wife, Jamie Meach, filed a complaint against Manet and the Cambodian government on April 8 last year, accusing them of torture, terrorism, and false imprisonment.
“We will continue our case in Washington DC. I regret to hear the ruling,” said Jamie Meach.
Opposition lawmaker Nhay Chamroeun, who joined the case as a plaintiff early this year, said the process serving against Manet will be attempted when the general makes his next visit to the US.
“Whenever General Hun Manet sets his foot on US soil, we will serve him a court subpoena,” said Chamroeun.
Chamroeun and another fellow member of parliament were beaten by a group of pro-ruling party protesters, including some members of Prime Minister Hun Sen’s bodyguard unit, in October 2015.
Both witnesses could not be reached for comment. But Khavy told VOA in an interview before Thursday’s hearing that he had no knowledge of the altercation and that he was far from the incident when it took place.