Mr. Tat Thanh Cang burst into tears when he defended himself, and was asked to reduce 1-1.5 years in prison

Entering the argument, defending Mr. Tat Thanh Cang (former Permanent Deputy Secretary of the Ho Chi Minh City Party Committee), lawyer Le Nguyen Hoa said that the legal nature of report 12A and report 13 is completely different. together.

Statement 12A made due to fraud, not approved by Sadeco’s Board of Directors, is invalid and has no effect. Statement 13 is made in accordance with the prescribed order, approved by Sadeco’s Board of Directors, so it has legal validity.

Lawyer Hoa said that the Court found that Mr. Cang’s “agree” pen on report 1148 (made on the basis of illegal report 12A) of the City Party Committee’s Office was illegal.

In his own defense, Mr. Tat Thanh Cang admitted that there was a mistake in not carefully checking the reports submitted by his subordinates, leading to a “yes” pen, for the City Party Committee’s Office to vote for Sadeco’s approval. issue 9 million shares. Then, Sadeco sold these shares cheaply to Nguyen Kim Company.

“The defendant had too much faith in the owner’s agency, did not imagine that the office staff at the committee level would arbitrarily change a report of the collective that had been consulted. Therefore, it was not discovered that Report 12A was forged,” said Mr. Tat Thanh Cang, bursting into tears.

Mr. Cang said that the Standing City Party Committee did not advocate investment in real estate, banking, securities and the defendant also did not intend to continue to invest in increasing charter capital in SADECO.

“When the defendant accepted the role of Deputy Secretary of the City Party Committee, the work was very heavy, he never had a day off. The defendant did not create conditions for Te Tri Dung in the Sadeco case. The defendant did not take personal interests, the defendant only flawed and made mistakes when not checking”, Mr. Cang choked his voice.

Previously, the High-Level People’s Procuracy in Ho Chi Minh City said that the 10-year prison sentence that the first-instance level declared was strict. Therefore, the representative of the Procuracy proposed the Appellate Court to consider the sentence, reducing the prison sentence from 1 year to 1 year and 6 months for the accused.

According to the first-instance judgment, Mr. Tat Thanh Cang approved the issuance of 9 million shares of Sadeco to Nguyen Kim Company, ignoring the auction of the value of the shares. This coffee pen of Mr. Cang caused Sadeco to lose 1,103 billion VND.

Defendant Te Chi Dung took advantage of his position and power to approve and spend a lot of money from the reward fund for himself and other members of the Board of Directors for personal use in contravention of regulations. Defendant Dung appropriated over 1.7 billion VND.

Defendant Ho Thi Thanh Phuc followed the direction of Mr. Te Tri Dung, signed the reports and proposed reports to the Board of Members of IPC Company and the Board of Directors of Sadeco on increasing charter capital for the Company. Nguyen Kim Company and voted to approve the issuance of shares to Nguyen Kim Company without a public auction, without organizing price appraisal.

Thanh Phuong