On the morning of December 21, the trial took place to continue the debate, Mr. Dinh La Thang said the Procuracy has made a big mistake in its accusation against him and other defendants who worked in the Ministry of Transport.
After the Procuracy said that the prosecution of former Minister of Transport Mr. Dinh La Thang is correct and the defendant is responsible for the main case, Thang’s lawyers disagreed.
At the same time, in the self-defense section, Mr. Thang also continued to deny the indictment, questioning the unknown points in the case such as his role, the right to use and ownership of property as well as the amount of more than VND725 billion ($30.9 million).
As in the previous self-justification, Mr. Dinh La Thang once again denied the indictment: “I dismiss the indictment because it is unfounded speculation, not on the basis of case files and developments in trial and opinion of lawyers at this court session.”
He said “I found that the representative of the City Procuracy gave unreasonable serious accusation against him and other defendants who worked at the Ministry of Transport. I require the prosecutor to further explain my alleged role in the case.”
In addition, Mr. Thang said that the Procuracy made mistakes when arguing about the ownership, the right to use property (the right to collect expressway charges in Ho Chi Minh City – Trung Luong). Specifically, the state management agency has transferred the right to collect fees for 5 years to Yen Khanh Company (manipulated by Dinh Ngoc System).
Mr. Thang said that this is the transfer of the right to exploit the property, not the transfer of the ownership of the property. Accordingly, Yen Khanh Company has the right to organize the collection of fees and manage the proceeds from toll collection activities.
For the winning amount, Mr. Thang said that this is the legal proceeds of the auction winner, requested the Panel to solicit an appraisal amount of more than VND725 billion.
“Who is the request for an appraisal of the amount of more than VND725 billion? What is wrong must be handled in accordance with the law. I request the representative of the Procuracy to prove that Yen Khanh Company was suffering a loss as the Procuracy concluded. It is necessary to determine who this money really belongs to, and then handle it properly,” Mr. Thang said.
“I hope the Procuracy will change its allegations so that I and other accused individuals can respect them,” Mr. Thang said in court.
Presenting the defense point of view, lawyer Truong Trong Nghia said that, through researching files and the results of interrogation in court, the above conclusions of the Procuracy on Mr. Dinh La’s criminal behavior is inconsistent with the evidence gathered; not satisfied with the crime of “violating the regulations on the management and use of state assets, causing loss and waste” that the Procuracy accused Mr. Thang.
According to the lawyer, the fact that the Procuracy accused Mr. Thang of introducing Dinh Ngoc He was unfounded because there was no evidence.
The original documents sent by Deputy Minister of Transport Nguyen Hong Truong to Mr. Thang are for informational purposes only; there was no evidence to prove that Mr. Thang was reported and knew that the auction was illegal.
In addition, according to attorney Nghia, the indictment stated that Mr. Thang has a decisive role in selling the rights to collect fees: “It makes sense because Mr. Thang is Minister. But the sale of toll rights is done by a board.
Mr. Thang can not decide to sell to whom, how to sell, how. Minister for general management only. There is no evidence that Mr. Thang has a decisive role in the auction result,” lawyer Nghia stated.
In this case, more than VND725 billion cannot be considered as a loss from the State. Because, after selling the rights to collect fees, the Ministry of Transport has received more than VND 2 trillion. So the fee collected is from the winning auction business, not by the Ministry of Transport.
Tuoi Tre newspaper quotes the opinion of lawyer Hoang Van Huong – the defender of Mr. Dinh La Thang – that Procuracy is applying the point of presumption accusation.
Attorney Huong said that the testimony of defendant Duong Thi Tram Anh (deputy general director of Cuu Long Company) saying “knowing that Mr. He was the son-in-law of a high-ranking leader, so defendant Dinh La Thang helped He join the project” is baseless.
The lawyer confirmed that this leader had no daughter, so Mr. He was not the son-in-law, so the statement of the defendant Duong Thi Tram Anh was fabricated.
The lawyer also said that phone calls between Mr. Thang and Mr. He, or between Mr. Thang and defendant Duong Tuan Minh (General Director of Cuu Long Company), if any, cannot prove that Mr. Thang helped Mr. He participate in the project. As such, all these allegations are attributable.
Regarding criminal liability, the lawyer holds the opinion that Procuracy cannot prove that Mr. Thang violated the laws. The Procuracy failed to prove the role of Mr. Thang: mastermind, practice, incite, assist under Article 17 of the Criminal Code.
At the same time, the lawyer emphasized that the client cannot be considered stubborn and a fact that aggravates the amount of crime when the defendant proves he has not committed a crime.
Previously, in the Dec 18 session, the Procuracy asked the Trial Panel to sentence former Minister of Transport Dinh La Thang to 10-11 years in prison for violating regulations on the management and use of State property causing losses, waste, and free additional penalties.
Mr. Thang is serving a 30-year prison term in two cases occurring at PetroVietnam Construction Joint Stock Corporation, Vietnam Oil and Gas Group, and Ocean Commercial Joint Stock Bank. At the beginning of the year, he continued to be prosecuted in the case of appointing a contractor to implement the Phu Tho Ethanol project, causing more than VND600 billion in damage.
Mr. Dinh La Thang received 10 years in prison, Ut “Bald” was sentenced to life
On the morning of December 22, the Ho Chi Minh City People’s Court issued a verdict against Mr. Dinh La Thang, Dinh Ngoc He (ie Ut “bald“), and 18 other people on allegations of wrongdoing in selling the right to collect tolls on Trung Luong expressway.
According to the first-instance sentence, Mr. Thang received a 10-year prison sentence for the violation of regulations on the management and use of State property, causing loss and waste.
Combining the penalty with the previous two sentences, Mr. Thang had to serve a general sentence of 30 years in prison (the highest level of term imprisonment).
With this same crime, former Deputy Minister of Transport Nguyen Hong Truong was sentenced to 4 years and 6 months in prison.
The court sentenced Mr. Dinh Ngoc He to life imprisonment on charges of fraudulent appropriation of property; 13 years in prison for taking advantage of positions and powers to influence others for self-seeking. The combined punishment is life imprisonment.
What does the trial panel say?
Mr. Dinh La Thang, as Minister of Transport, assigned to organize the development of a project to sell toll collection rights. However, due to his previous relationship, Mr. Thang introduced Dinh Ngoc He to approach the project, participate in the auction, and win the auction illegally.
From the documents in the case file, comparing the defendants’ testimony at the court and at the investigative agency, the Trial Panel said that there is a basis to confirm that Mr. Thang and officials at the Ministry of Transport violated the regulations on the management and use of State assets, causing wasteful loss.
For Mr. He, the Trial Panel said that although he did not have the conditions to participate in the auction, had no financial capacity, Mr. He took advantage of the relationship with Mr. Thang, arising the intention of appropriating State property and the court judged that this is “cunning, sophisticated behavior to bypass the authorities.” When collecting fees, He has instructed employees to use software and high technology to appropriate State assets.
Therefore, the Panel forced Dinh Ngoc He to hand over VND725 billion to the State budget; continue to maintain distraint orders and blockade of assets of He’s companies to ensure enforcement of judgments.
What is Thang’s last word?
At the afternoon trial on December 21, when he had the last word, Mr. Thang gave his point of thanking the Trial Panel, his lawyers as well as other lawyers for clarifying the case.
Mr. Thang was said to take his responsibility as the minister for political, administration, public affairs in the case, but not criminal. Once again, he expected the Trial Panel to evaluate objectively and fairly.
For Deputy Minister Nguyen Hong Truong and his subordinates, Mr. Thang hopes the Trial Panel will not investigate their criminal liability.
Thoibao.de (Translated)
