If the secretary does not know the violations of his deputy, how can he manage anything?

Delegate Luu Binh Nhuong wondered what the Secretary of Dong Nai Provincial Party Committee was managing when he did not know about the Deputy Secretary's violations that had occurred over a long period of time.

Talking about the fact that the Secretary of Dong Nai Provincial Party Committee did not know about the violations of Deputy Secretary Phan Thi My Thanh, Deputy Luu Binh Nhuong raised some hypotheses.

One is that he really doesn't know, two is that he doesn't have enough information, three is that his subordinates didn't report to the staff, four is because of a close relationship, five is that he wants to keep it for his locality so he doesn't say anything.

Standing Member of the National Assembly's Committee on Social Affairs Luu Binh Nhuong

“But after all, it is his responsibility to know. If he doesn’t know, he has to find out. Because in the province, he has the most power,” the standing member of the National Assembly’s Committee on Social Affairs emphasized.

According to Mr. Nhuong, if the National Assembly deputies do not know, the voters do not know, they cannot be blamed because they do not have information, so what basis do they have to say it? But for the Secretary, the law requires him to know.

"If the Secretary manages his staff without knowing information about them, what can he manage?", Delegate Nhuong wondered.

He said that the process of considering appointing officials and the steps involved should be followed to determine who is responsible for handling the matter.

The Secretary is the one who has the right to know and has the full right to request to know, has the right to verify, has the basis and capacity to verify why it is not done.

If you say you can't do it or don't have the ability, then I think you are not qualified to continue holding that position, including as a staff officer or leader.

The conclusion of the Central Inspection Committee mentioned signs of corruption and violations of party members' prohibitions, but Ms. Phan Thi My Thanh was promoted from a department director to the position of Deputy Secretary of the Provincial Party Committee. So how should the collective and individual responsibilities in Ms. Thanh's promotion be considered?

I think the collective responsibility must be clear, it must be known. Individuals can hide in the collective but the collective cannot hide anywhere, the collective cannot blame the individual. That is in principle.

It is natural for an individual to deal with a leader or a responsible person, but the law also stipulates collective responsibility. If that collective is unhealthy, that collective must be dealt with.

The important issue is to consider how far to handle it based on the Party's regulations and the State's laws.

Need a project to combat vested interests and backyards

According to you, in this case there are signs of group interests and what disciplinary action should be taken?

It is clear in which cases there is a possibility of group interests because the husband-wife relationship can be considered close.

The conclusion of the Central Inspection Committee said that Ms. Thanh's violations were serious, and I agree with this. So we understand that, if we consider it from a criminal perspective, the seriousness is at the second level. So there needs to be a corresponding disciplinary action.

From the Party's perspective, the first level is to blame, the second level is to warn. From the Party's perspective and for high-ranking officials, this is already a serious punishment.

But the issue that public opinion is raising now is how to handle it from the state side, so the agencies need to research and consider applying it.

The conclusion of the Central Inspection Committee also showed that Ms. Thanh had many violations related to her husband's company. Do you think this is a manifestation of the story of front yard, back yard?

The story of front and back yards has been talked about for a long time and we must confirm that this is true. Many officials have back yards, many businesses have backers. That leads to double violations, then continuous violations.

This story probably needs its own research and a project to fight against vested interests and backdoors. This is one of the branches of anti-corruption, but it needs to be thoroughly researched to have an effective solution.

We have only raised the issue but have not yet found a solution to combat group interests and backyards. We have identified them but still lack a mechanism to monitor and consider handling them.

According to VNN