The People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City is preparing for the first-instance trial of defendant Diep Dung (53 years old, former Chairman of the Board of Directors of Ho Chi Minh City Union of Commercial Cooperatives – Saigon Co.op) for the crime of “Appropriating State secret documents” in the form of a closed trial. Along with the court are two defendants Nguyen Hoai Bac (37 years old, former officer working at the Economic Security Department, Ho Chi Minh City Police), Le Thi Phuong Hong (42 years old, freelancing), with the crime of ” Deliberately disclosing state secrets.
The People’s Procuracy maintains its position in the indictment
Previously, in January 2022, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City returned additional investigation documents, requesting the People’s Procuracy of Ho Chi Minh City to clarify a number of contents, including: defendant Diep Dung complained, claiming that there was no criminal act. Appropriating state secret documents”; request to determine which documents are classified and top secret according to the Prime Minister’s Decision No. 41/QD-TTg dated May 29, 2020 on promulgating a list of state secrets in the field of national security. family, social order and safety to have grounds for prosecution; clarify the petition of the defense attorneys for the defendant.
According to the profile, Nguyen Hoai Bac is a member of the working group to verify violations at Saigon Co.op. Bac brought some collected documents to the place where she lived with Ms. Hong and exchanged messages with Hong regarding the verification of the case.
In many different ways (texting, asking, taking notes, monitoring the phone…), Hong understood about North’s work progress and actively contacted and informed Mr. Diep Dung by phone even though he was not familiar with it before. know. The reason, according to Hong’s testimony, is to buy cheap goods (Hong has a grocery store).
Among the messages Hong sent, the investigating agency determined that the content was in a secret and top secret document.
After additional investigation, the People’s Procuracy of Ho Chi Minh City maintained the position of indictment against Mr. Diep Dung for the crime of “Appropriating state secret documents”. According to this agency, Mr. Diep Dung is the main person responsible for the mistakes that occurred at Saigon Co.op. The messages from Hong’s phone match the content of the messages seized from Mr. Dung’s phone. Mr. Dung received information from Hong and provided information for Hong to collect and report.
“The accused’s conduct has violated the state confidentiality regime in the fields of politics, national defense, security, foreign affairs, economy, science and technology and other fields. If not prevented in time, Time will affect the results of investigation, verifying the source of crime at Saigon Co.op that the Security Investigation Agency of the Ho Chi Minh City Police Department is handling in accordance with the law. should be strictly handled before the law for education, deterrence and general prevention,” the indictment stated.
The case of Mr. Diep Dung has been investigated many times at the request of the court
Lawyer proposes to review the nature of the case
Meanwhile, the lawyer defending the legitimate rights and interests of Mr. Diep Dung said that it is necessary to evaluate the nature of the case, objective behavior and subjective perception of Mr. Diep Dung; The evidence is unfounded…
According to the petition of Doctor – lawyer Phan Trung Hoai (Ho Chi Minh City Bar Association) sent to legal authorities before the trial, the act of appropriating state secret documents is an act of using force, threatening using force, kidnapping, robbery, fraud, abusing trust… to appropriate state secret documents.
Here, Mr. Diep Dung made no such moves; he also has no ability to know if it is secret or not. The texting is by Hong’s initiative; Hong’s knowledge of the case related to Saigon Co.op came from receiving real and fake information from North.
Lawyer Phan Trung Hoai said that “confidential documents” used by the investigative agency as a basis to prove criminal acts must not be included in the case file, but only provided to the court if requested, is not in accordance with the law. regulations, limiting the right to access evidence and documents to defend Mr. Diep Dung. What Le Thi Phuong Hong actively messaged Mr. Diep Dung is not a state secret document…
“The essence of Ms. Hong’s reporting to Mr. Dung is information during the criminal reporting phase. It should be understood as information belonging to the investigation secret; thus, Mr. Dung is not involved in the crime charged. Prosecuting agency. Request the procedure-conducting agency to review the nature of the case,” – lawyer Phan Trung Hoai suggested.
Need to meet the elements that constitute a crime
According to the provisions of Clause 1, Article 2 of the 2018 Law on Protection of State Secrets, “State secret is information with important contents determined on grounds by the head of a competent agency or organization. in accordance with this Law, have not yet been made public. , active or otherwise”. There are three levels of secrecy, including: top secret, top secret, and secret.
In the crime of “Appropriating State secret documents” (Article 337 of the Penal Code 2015 amended and supplemented in 2017), the offender only committed one objective act, that is, “appropriating” but with many Various tricks such as: using force, threatening to use force, physically or mentally threatening the manager of state secret documents, or using deceitful tricks to defraud the holders of house secret documents. country; abusing trust or stealthily appropriating state secret documents, or taking advantage of positions and powers to directly manage state secret documents to appropriate such documents.
Offenders commit acts of appropriating state secret documents intentionally, that is, when appropriating state secret documents, the offenders are well aware that their actions are dangerous to society, see before the consequences of that act and want the consequences to happen or the offender is well aware that his/her act is dangerous to society, foresees the consequences of such act that may occur, although undesired, but consciously let the consequences happen.
Thus, before prosecuting the accused for the crime of “Appropriating State secret documents”, the authorities need to determine whether the object of the crime is “State secret documents” or not. . Next, it is necessary to determine whether the offender has “appropriated” behavior or not.
Lawyer Nguyen Van Hau, Vice Chairman of Ho Chi Minh City Bar Association
at Blogtuan.info – Source: Soha.vn – Read the original article here
