Taboo for leaders to receive sponsorship to go abroad to 'back up' businesses

Currently, public opinion is concerned about the information that tycoon Trinh Suong sponsored leaders in Soc Trang to go abroad. What do you think about this incident?

National Assembly Delegate Pham Van Hoa:The case of Mr. Trinh Suong sponsoring the Soc Trang provincial leaders to go abroad needs to be viewed objectively, from the press and official information from the local leaders. This issue is very delicate and sensitive, so it must be considered carefully and objectively.

Enterprises sponsoring local leaders to go abroad can be considered from two aspects. First, sponsoring them to go on business trips is generally not a problem. This is not only happening in Soc Trang, but some other provinces and cities also use money from enterprises to go abroad, it is not that there is no such thing.

However, the important thing is whether or not businesses sponsor provincial leaders to go abroad with the purpose of exploiting, covering up, and backing them for illegal business? That is the important thing.

It is good that people sponsor local leaders to work abroad in a spirit of pure support, which brings benefits to the country, the province, or the business. But it is taboo to accept sponsorship from people to go abroad, to let them take advantage of it to cover up their illegal business, to back them up, to protect them, that is not allowed.

Soc Trang province leaders took souvenir photos with tycoon Trinh Suong in Japan.

In the past few days, I have been closely following the case in Soc Trang, related to Mr. Trinh Suong's counterfeiting of gasoline, especially in the story of sponsoring leaders to go abroad.

Regarding this matter, in my opinion, the locality first needs to have clear official information, to see the actual purpose of Mr. Trinh Suong's enterprise's sponsorship, to clarify that issue, otherwise, if it remains ambiguous, it will have a negative impact on Soc Trang province, and may also affect other provinces.

So, according to you, should the Central Inspection Committee intervene and clarify?

That matter is for the relevant authorities to consider and resolve specifically. But in my opinion, the Central Inspection Committee has very specific regulations on which cases are eligible, which are not eligible, and which cases are directed to subordinates for implementation.

I think, whatever happens at the local level, the Inspection Committee at all levels will have enough authority to carry out that task. In terms of the state, it is the inspection agency, and in terms of the Party, it is the Inspection Committee. If such an incident occurs, the locality has enough authority to handle the arising problems.

How do you evaluate the situation of businesses sponsoring local leaders to go abroad for this or that reason?

The incident may have occurred in this or that locality but was not discovered. At that time, people thought it was a completely normal thing, but when something happened, it became a problem. In my opinion, this incident must be handled as it is discovered and handled with the right person, the right crime, and the right law.

It is necessary to clarify the matter to clear the name of your comrade if he is truly wronged; at the same time, you must strictly handle your comrade if he is being taken advantage of without anyone knowing. In that case, if you do not handle him, you must also review his responsibilities to set an example for cadres to follow.

Currently, the Politburo and the Secretariat have regulations on the responsibility to set an example, in which it is especially emphasized that the higher the position, the more exemplary the leaders must be. Therefore, leaders need to "look" at that to adjust their behavior and activities, to become exemplary leaders, bringing trust to party members and the people.

Thank you!