Today, Trinh Xuan Thanh received his second sentence.

Nearly two weeks after the trial opened, this morning, Monday (February 5th), the Hanoi People's Court announced the verdict for Mr. Trinh Xuan Thanh (former Chairman of Vietnam Petroleum Construction Corporation – PVC) and seven accomplices in the embezzlement case at the PetroVietnam Power Real Estate Company (PVP Land).

According to the indictment and the prosecutor's conclusions at the trial, on March 27, 2010, the Pacific Trans-Service Joint Stock Company, consisting of five founding shareholders, unanimously signed a deposit contract to transfer all 24 million shares they owned in the Nam Dan Plaza high-end commercial and office complex project on Pham Hung Street to Le Hoa Binh (former chairman of the Board of Directors of 1/5 Construction and Service Joint Stock Company) at a price of nearly 21,000 VND per share, equivalent to 52 million VND per square meter.

After signing the deposit contract, Le Hoa Binh signed a share transfer contract with each founding shareholder of Xuyen Thai Binh Duong Company. While four shareholders completed the transfer at the aforementioned price, the remaining shareholder, PVP Land, which also held the largest shareholding (50.5%), sold its shares for only 13,578 VND per share, equivalent to 34 million VND per square meter. The total contract value exceeded 191 billion VND, a decrease of 87 billion VND compared to the price in the deposit contract, and this amount was identified as a loss for PVP Land.

The investigation determined that defendants Trinh Xuan Thanh, Dinh Manh Thang (former chairman of the Board of Directors of Song Da Petroleum Company – younger brother of Dinh La Thang, former chairman of Vietnam Petroleum Corporation), Thai Kieu Huong (former deputy general director of Vietsan Company), Dao Duy Phong (former chairman of PVP Land), Nguyen Ngoc Sinh (former general director of PVP Land), Dang Sy Hung (head of investment department of PVP Land), and Huynh Nguyen Quoc Duy (freelance broker) colluded, directed, and conspired with defendants Le Hoa Binh and Nguyen Thi Kim Thoa (former chief accountant of Company 1/5) to sign a share transfer contract at a price of 34 million VND per square meter.

Authorities determined that the low-priced transfers were intended to be shared among the defendants, totaling 49 billion VND. Specifically, Mr. Thanh is accused of embezzling 14 billion VND; Mr. Thang: 5 billion; Mr. Phong: 8 billion; Mr. Sinh: 2 billion; and Mr. Hung: 20 billion.

The prosecution determined that all more than 12 million shares owned by PVP Land in Xuyen Thai Binh Duong Company belonged to the state's capital contribution, because PVC is an enterprise with nearly 89% of its capital owned by the Vietnam Oil and Gas Group (PVN).

The prosecution determined that, both at the trial and during the investigation, Mr. Thanh did not admit to having agreed to or directed the sale of PVP Land shares at a price lower than their actual value in order to share and embezzle the difference.

The prosecution argued that the public investigation results presented at the trial showed that PVC held 14 million shares, owning 28% of PVP Land's charter capital. Meanwhile, Mr. Dao Duy Phong and Mr. Nguyen Ngoc Sinh were appointed by Mr. Thanh as representatives of PVC's capital contribution in PVP Land. When PVP Land wanted to transfer shares, it had to report to and obtain the approval of the PVC Board of Directors. Therefore, Mr. Thanh had the authority to decide whether or not to allow the transfer of shares.

According to the Procuratorate, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the defendant Thanh was the one who decided and directed the transfer of more than 12 million shares of PVP Land in Xuyen Thai Binh Duong Company to Le Hoa Binh and received 14 billion VND from the price difference.

On January 25th, the Procuratorate proposed a life sentence for Mr. Thanh for the crime of embezzlement of property (under Article 353 of the 2015 Penal Code).

Similarly, for the remaining seven defendants, the prosecution concluded that they had committed the crimes as charged in the indictment and proposed sentences ranging from 8 to 17 years in prison.

Prosecutor: The defendants could not overcome the temptation of material possessions.

In the indictment, the prosecution determined that the defendants' criminal acts were particularly dangerous to society; not only did they infringe upon a particularly large sum of state funds (87 billion VND), but they also caused the Nam Dan Plaza project to stall and not be implemented from 2010 to the present; resulting in over 9,000 m2 of project land on Pham Hung Street not being put into use, causing waste and damage.

The defendants' criminal conduct also undermined the integrity and accountability of state asset management, affecting public trust in the economic efficiency of state-owned enterprises and creating negative public opinion.

The defendants Trinh Xuan Thanh, Dao Duy Phong, Nguyen Ngoc Sinh, and Dinh Manh Thang were leaders of large enterprises who had held various positions, but due to personal gain, they could not resist the temptation of material benefits.

"The defendants' criminal behavior is one of the manifestations of the decline in public service ethics among a segment of officials and civil servants, a part of the corruption problem, reflecting the self-serving interests of individuals and businesses," the representative of the Procuratorate stated.

Regarding defendant Thanh, the prosecution noted that he held a position of authority but employed tactics to conceal his criminal acts. During the investigation and at the trial, the defendant was not entirely truthful, only admitting to a portion of his criminal acts.

Lawyer: 14 billion VND embezzled in 90,000 banknotes, how could it possibly fit into a suitcase?

However, during the subsequent debate, both Mr. Thanh and his five defense lawyers vehemently countered this assertion. Mr. Thanh steadfastly maintained that he did not commit the crime as concluded by the prosecution. He presented numerous arguments claiming that he neither had the authority nor directed the transfer of shares at a low price. The defendant also denied embezzling 14 billion VND. Mr. Thanh's lawyers requested an investigative experiment to determine whether the suitcase could contain 14 billion VND, as alleged by the prosecution. During the trial, all of Mr. Thanh's and his lawyers' arguments and requests were rejected by the prosecution.

The remaining defendants, although denying the charges of wrongdoing, all requested leniency in their final statements, except for defendant Nguyen Thi Kim Thoa.

Bao Ha