Mr. Kien has "invisible" power at ACB Bank

On the afternoon of May 22, the first-instance trial of Nguyen Duc Kien and his accomplices continued with the questioning to clarify the act of "Intentionally violating economic management regulations causing serious consequences".

The defendants in the trial on the afternoon of May 22.

Intentionally violating, causing damage of thousands of billions of dong

Regarding the defendants' intentional wrongdoing, the prosecution agency determined that, implementing the policy dated March 22, 2010 of the Standing Board of Directors (BOD) of ACB Bank (including Mr. Tran Xuan Gia, Le Vu Ky, Pham Trung Cang, Trinh Kim Quang, Ly Xuan Hai) and Nguyen Duc Kien on entrusting individuals to deposit VND and USD at credit institutions, from June 27, 2011 to September 5, 2011, Ly Xuan Hai (General Director of ACB) directed and authorized Chief Accountant Nguyen Van Hoa to entrust the amount of nearly 719 billion VND to 19 ACB employees to deposit savings at Viettinbank Nha Be Branch and Viettinbank Ho Chi Minh City Branch.

The entire amount of trust money was fraudulently appropriated by Huynh Thi Huyen Nhu.

Thus, the defendants' act of agreeing and issuing a policy to authorize ACB bank employees to deposit money into Viettinbank violated the provisions of Article 106 of the 2010 Law on Credit Institutions and caused a loss of nearly VND 719 billion to ACB bank.

In this case, Ly Xuan Hai, as a Standing Member of the Board of Directors and General Director of ACB Bank, proposed and participated in the unification of policies to entrust employees to deposit money in credit institutions, which is against the law; directly directed and implemented the entrustment of employees to deposit money in Viettinbank, causing a loss of nearly 719 billion VND.

Ly Xuan Hai also participated in agreeing to propose a policy of buying shares on the stock market in violation of the law, causing a loss of nearly 688 billion VND to ACB bank.

Regarding Nguyen Duc Kien, although this defendant did not participate in the Board of Directors of ACB Bank, he was appointed by the Board of Directors of ACB Bank as Vice Chairman of the Founding Council of ACB Bank, and was allowed to participate and give opinions at all meetings of the Board of Directors and the Standing Board of Directors of ACB Bank.

Thus, although he does not hold a position approved by the State Bank, with the above position and as a representative of the group of shareholders holding 9.03% of charter capital, Nguyen Duc Kien has the role of directing and controlling all administrative and operational activities of ACB bank.

This statement by the Procuracy has clarified the power of Mr. Kien at ACB bank even though he does not hold the highest position.

In that role, Nguyen Duc Kien agreed with the Standing Board of Directors of ACB Bank to propose a policy of entrusting individuals to deposit money in credit institutions in violation of the law, causing a loss of more than 719 billion VND.

In addition, as Chairman of the ACB Bank Investment Council, Mr. Kien directly directed the implementation of the policy of buying ACB bank shares on the stock market in violation of the law, causing damage to ACB bank of more than 688 billion VND.

The prosecution agency determined that the above behavior of Nguyen Duc Kien violated the crime of "Intentionally violating state regulations on economic management causing serious consequences", as prescribed in Article 165 of the Penal Code.

Mr. Kien has "invisible" power

At the beginning of the afternoon session, defendants Nguyen Duc Kien, Le Vu Ky, Trinh Kim Quang, Pham Trung Cang, and Huynh Quang Tuan were isolated from the courtroom so that the panel of judges could question defendant Ly Xuan Hai.

Responding to questions from the jury, defendant Ly Xuan Hai said that the policy of allowing deposit entrustment was approved by the Board of Directors of ACB Bank in March 2010. At that time, ACB Bank had 11 members on the Board of Directors, including Tran Xuan Gia, Le Vu Ky, Pham Trung Cang and defendant Ly Xuan Hai himself.

"Although I am the General Director, I am under the authority of the Board of Directors" - defendant Hai said.

According to this person, the Board of Directors of ACB Bank meets once a month. The convening of the Board of Directors meeting is under the responsibility of Mr. Tran Xuan Gia. On March 22, 2010, the Board of Directors met to discuss ACB Bank's response to the market's many fluctuations.

The general spirit was consensus on how to overcome difficulties during the economic recession. The meeting did not focus on business efficiency and growth. The members of the Board of Directors mainly expressed their views on how to ensure the solvency of ACB Bank and avoid falling into a state of reduced liquidity.

After the court finished questioning defendant Ly Xuan Hai, the representative of the People's Procuracy asked the defendant to clarify: "Is letting employees entrust deposits against the Law on Credit Institutions? Ly Xuan Hai replied: At that time, the Law on Credit Institutions was in effect, but there were no guiding documents. Accordingly, entrusting deposits still applied the old documents of the State Bank."

Defendant Ly Xuan Hai denied instructing employees to deposit money at interest rates higher than the ceiling interest rate and said that it was Mr. Nguyen Van Hoa - Chief Accountant of ACB Bank. Defendant Hai also said that the policy of entrusting ACB employees to deposit money took place around March 2010.

When it was defendant Le Vu Ky’s turn to answer the interrogation, the panel asked him to clarify who proposed the entrustment of high-interest deposits. But he said he could not remember. According to defendant Le Vu Ky, Nguyen Duc Kien had a decisive role even though he did not participate in the Board of Directors of ACB Bank. If Mr. Kien and the members of the Board of Directors did not approve, they could not have proposed or directed employees to deposit money at high interest rates.

Responding to the questions of the People's Court, defendant Trinh Kim Quang, Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of ACB Bank, said that at ACB Bank, Mr. Tran Mong Hung - Chairman of the Board of Founders and Nguyen Duc Kien (Vice Chairman of the Board of Founders) are the two most powerful people.

Regarding the role of Mr. Kien, defendant Quang admitted that at ACB Bank, Nguyen Duc Kien had "invisible" power and said that the person who proposed the deposit was Ly Xuan Hai, this defendant did not know about the deposit in Vietinbank.

Speaking further about this, defendant Quang said that the deposit exceeding the ceiling (over 14% at that time) was not the fault of ACB Bank but the fault of the mobilizer (Vietinbank).

After the break, the panel questioned defendant Huynh Quang Tuan. According to defendant Tuan, at ACB bank there is a "custom" that in addition to official members, the Board of Directors and the Standing Board of Directors often have guests. At the meeting on March 22, 2010, Huynh Quang Tuan said that he was not yet a member of the Board of Directors but attended the meeting as a guest. At these meetings, if asked, guests can give their opinions.

Recalling the meeting, defendant Tuan said that the meeting had many contents, at this time defendant Tuan was the Deputy General Director responsible for the Northern region.

Regarding the Resolution of the Board of Directors, the defendant said that it was only when the case was initiated that he realized there was such a "Resolution".

The panel questioned defendant Pham Trung Cang.

According to the second indictment of the Supreme People's Procuracy on the "Mr. Kien" case - Mr. Pham Trung Cang (born in 1954, in Long An) - former Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of ACB Bank is one of two additional accomplices. Mr. Pham Trung Cang was prosecuted for the crime of "Intentionally violating State regulations on economic management causing serious consequences".

Mr. Pham Trung Cang's actions were related to ACB Bank entrusting deposits to Vietinbank, causing a loss of more than 718 billion VND.

Defendant Cang stated that he attended the regular meeting of the Board of Directors on March 22, 2010. The meeting included the Founding Council, the Standing Board of Directors... The meeting discussed how to deal with the remaining money in the bank (due to many people depositing money but businesses facing difficulties did not borrow).

According to defendant Cang, Ly Xuan Hai was the one who came up with the idea of ​​depositing money in other banks to avoid losses because there were also some employees of other banks who deposited money in ACB Bank. The Board of Directors at that time had two concerns: Employees would take the money and run away, and the legal concerns were whether it was appropriate.

At that time, Ly Xuan Hai said he had consulted and said there was nothing wrong. The founding council agreed with Ly Xuan Hai's initiative.

Responding to the panel of judges about the role of Mr. Kien in issuing the Resolution, defendant Cang said that if Mr. Kien did not agree, the Board of Directors' Resolution would not be passed. Defendant Cang emphasized: "The role of the Founding Council is very important."

In court, defendant Cang stated: On December 31, 2010, he submitted a resignation letter to work for another bank and it was later approved, but he still had a position on the credit council of ACB Bank.

Regarding the entrustment of deposits to employees, defendant Cang said: after resigning, defendant was not allowed to report because he was no longer a member of the Board of Directors. Defendant Cang also stated that there was no requirement for reporting and he did not know whether ACB bank still entrusts deposits or not.

Regarding the participation in signing the Resolution document on March 22, 2010, defendant Cang said that at that time there was no mistake, but after the new Law on Credit Institutions came into effect, the defendant said "I don't know if there is any mistake anymore".

If the implementation of this Resolution - if it is contrary to the Law on Credit Institutions, defendant Cang still asserts that he is still not responsible.

The panel separated the defendants and continued questioning Mr. Kien.

Talking about the role of the Founding Council, Kien said that it is an advisory body to the Board of Directors in operating ACB Bank.

Regarding the regular meeting of the Board of Directors on October 23, 2010, Kien said that it was a meeting and invited the founding board members, Mr. Tran Mong Hung and Nguyen Duc Kien, to attend. During the regular meeting, many contents were discussed about the development plan of ACB Bank. At the meeting, Ly Xuan Hai proposed entrusting money to employees to deposit at other banks.

At the meeting, no members discussed, Mr. Tran Xuan Gia asked the members to express their opinions. Defendant Kien was not asked to express his opinion, but Kien said: "If I were to express my opinion, I would agree with this proposal."

Regarding the investigation agency's documents on Mr. Tran Mong Hung's proposal to reduce interest rates, defendant Kien did not agree. Kien once again affirmed that he was not asked for his opinion, but if asked, he would still agree.

Regarding the Board of Directors' Resolution, Kien clearly stated that the Board of Directors agreed to approve the deposit. And Mr. Hoa - Chief Accountant of ACB Bank at that time implemented the Resolution.

Regarding Kien's influence in the Board of Directors' Resolution, Kien said that he had no role in ACB Bank to influence the resolution. Kien also denied that ACB Bank sent money to other banks.

Regarding the statements of others, Kien said he would not comment on them, and that they would be responsible before the law for their statements.

“They are all long-time employees, some I respect very much, some are employees who were trained to become managers,” Kien said.

At 5:10 p.m., the Court adjourned. The trial will continue tomorrow.

According to VTC news/VOV