Mr. Tran Vinh Tuyen said that the crime was committed due to ‘negligence’, not self-interest

On June 8, the High People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City opened an appellate hearing of the case “Violation of regulations on management and use of property, causing loss, waste, and embezzlement of property” that occurred at the Agriculture Corporation Saigon (SAGRI) by former Vice President of Ho Chi Minh City Tran Vinh Tuyen and his accomplices.

The trial was chaired by Judge Hoang Minh Thinh. The trial is scheduled to take place from June 8 to 10.

Previously, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City sentenced defendant Le Tan Hung (former General Director of SAGRI) to 25 years in prison for the crimes of “violating regulations on management and use of State assets, causing losses and wastefulness”. , “Embezzlement of property”.

Also for these two crimes, Nguyen Thi Thuy (former Chief Accountant of SAGRI) was sentenced to 20 years in prison for both crimes.

Mr. Tran Vinh Tuyen, defendant Tran Trong Tuan (former Director of Ho Chi Minh City Department of Construction) were each sentenced to 6 years together for the crime of “violating regulations on management and use of State property, causing loss and wastefulness. fee”.

The other defendants also received sentences ranging from 3 years in prison (but with suspended sentences) to 8 years in prison.

After the first-instance hearing, Mr. Tran Vinh Tuyen, Le Tan Hung and 5 other accomplices filed an appeal to reduce the punishment and request a review of the first-instance judgment.

According to the first-instance judgment, when the Housing Project in Quarter 4, Phuoc Long B Ward, District 9 (HCMC) built 80% of technical infrastructure works, the financial obligations to the State had not been fulfilled. , not yet eligible to transfer, no plan, no plan to divest from the approved project, Mr. Tran Vinh Tuyen still signed the decision approving the transfer of the above project to Phong Phu Corporation.

This decision of Mr. Tran Vinh Tuyen created a condition for Mr. Le Tan Hung and his accomplices to carry out the procedure for transferring the project in contravention of the law when not conducting price appraisal, determining the transfer value at market price. , causing damage of 672 billion VND.

In addition to the illegal project transfer, in 2016, Mr. Le Tan Hung also directed his subordinates to make 10 false records for officials and employees to visit and learn experiences in 16 countries to appropriate 13 countries. billions dong.

During the first interrogation, defendant Le Tan Hung admitted to the charges he had prosecuted, but asked the jury to reconsider the act of “Embezzlement of property” because the defendant used personal money to repay the money lost at SAGRI.

When the jury asked the defendant if there were any new reductions in the sentence, defendant Hung said that he had made every effort to overcome all the consequences before being prosecuted.

“The defendant was brought up from a revolutionary family, he made great efforts. The defendant’s family was extremely difficult because of having a sick child from a young age. I hope the jury considers reducing the punishment according to the Resolution. 03”, defendant Hung presented.

Agreeing with the charge of “violating regulations on management and use of state assets, causing loss and waste”, Mr. Tran Vinh Tuyen said that the first-instance level still had many issues that had not been thoroughly considered.

According to Mr. Tuyen, this project is not in charge of the defendant. When he received the report about the house transfer in Quarter 4, Phuoc Long B ward, District 9, he signed the document. After that, when he received the project report on the transferred list, he signed the decision without reporting to the Standing Committee and the People’s Committee of Ho Chi Minh City.

Explaining the omission and not fulfilling his own responsibilities, the defendant asserted that he knew the legal regulations, knew the documents of the Department of Industry and Trade in the dossier, read the dossier, and viewed the inspection conclusions. for Sargri newly signed but still errors occur.

Mr. Tuyen asserted that he had no self-interest but was only wrong due to negligence, not knowing what was wrong but still doing it, so Mr. Tuyen wanted the appellate level to consider it thoroughly.

Regarding the new reduced sentence, Mr. Tuyen said that he had just been examined and found that he had a cardiovascular disease.

Defendant Tran Trong Tuan said that he was unjust. “The first-instance judgment did not distinguish between legal procedures in the transfer of real estate projects to clearly define the responsibilities of individuals, so it unjustified me,” defendant Tuan affirmed.

According to defendant Tuan, the transfer of investment capital outside the enterprise is not a public auction. The first-instance judgment held that the transfer of capital required to be auctioned was not correct. According to regulations, the transfer of capital in limited companies must only be auctioned when capital is withdrawn, while SAGRI’s transfer of a housing project in Quarter 4 to Phong Phu Company is a form of investment cooperation, not a form of investment cooperation. capital withdrawal.

Thanh Phuong