Delayed in getting access to a lawyer, Vu 'Nhom' yelled at the police

On the morning of April 22, the High-Level People's Court in Ho Chi Minh City opened an appeal hearing to consider the appeal of Phan Van Anh Vu (aka Vu "Nhom", Chairman of the Board of Directors of Bac Nam 79 Company) against the verdict sentencing him to 17 years in prison for the crime ofLabuse of power to appropriate property

Brought to court early, Vu "Nhom" still maintained his demeanor as in previous court appearances with his hair cut high and slicked back, but he looked thinner. He appeared upset and spoke loudly to the escort officer when he was delayed in seeing his lawyer in court.

Looking haggard, Mr. Tran Phuong Binh (59 years old, former General Director, Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of DAB) with white hair sat quietly in the defendant's row. He was determined to be the mastermind in the case and only appealed to review the interest on the amounts of money that had to be compensated to DAB. He asked to take full civil responsibility on behalf of his subordinates and related people.

To serve the trial, in addition to the 26 defendants in the case, the court also summoned a representative of Dong A Bank as a witness.civil plaintiffand is the unithave related rights and obligationsand350 other units and individuals.

At the beginning of the session, the panel of judges said that some defendants who were released on bail were absent, and many lawyers had also filed requests to postpone the trial. Expressing his opinion, lawyer Nguyen Huu The Trach (defending Vu "Nhom") also requested to postpone the appeal trial to ensure the legitimate rights and interests of his client and other defendants.

After consultation, the panel of judges believed that the absence of many defendants and lawyers would not ensure objectivity, so the trial was postponed.

According to the first instance verdict, during the 10 years of running DAB, Mr. Binh and his accomplices committed a series of violations causing losses of more than 3,600 billion VND. The former General Director was accused of appropriating more than 2,000 billion VND, of which more than 200 billion VND was transferred to Vu by signing fake documents for buying and selling shares; buying 13.4 million USD but Vu has not yet returned it to DAB.

The remaining loss of more than 1,500 billion VND was due to Mr. Binh directing his subordinates to withdraw funds against the principle of paying interest outside the capital mobilization principle of 470 billion VND, 385 billion VND for foreign exchange trading, more than 610 taels of gold in accounts, 53 billion VND in the fraudulent settlement of a loan of 1,900 taels of gold for defendant Nguyen Hong Anh (former officer of Ho Chi Minh City Police).

Late last year, the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court sentenced Vu to 17 years in prison, combined with the 8-year prison sentence previously handed down by the Hanoi High People's Court (which has come into effect), the defendant must receive 25 years in prison and must pay compensation of more than 200 billion VND to DAB.

In addition, Vu was also recommended for investigation because it was believed that there were signs of other crimes related to the 13.4 million USD transaction with Mr. Binh.

Mr. Binh received a life sentence for two crimes.Intentionally violating state regulations on economic management causing serious consequences; Abusing trust to appropriate propertyOther defendants received 2 years suspended sentence to 30 years in prison.

After the first instance verdict, Vu appealed the entire verdict, affirming that he did not appropriate more than 200 billion VND from DAB and did not commit a crime.Abuse of power to appropriate property.In his appeal, Vu argued that the first instance court had not comprehensively and objectively assessed the evidence of the case. Because in court, Mr. Binh confirmed that he had concealed the situation of DongABank from Vu, if he told the truth, Vu did not invest in the bank. The conclusion of the investigation agency and the evidence in court were different, so there was no basis to charge the defendant.

Phan Van Anh Vu also stated that he did not discuss or agree with defendant Nguyen Duc Vinh (former head of the Treasury Department of DongABank) to withdraw this amount of money to lend to Bac Nam 79 Construction Company. Vu did not discuss with defendants Binh, Vinh, Nguyen Van Thuan (former deputy director of DongABank), Hung (former treasurer of DongABank) to collude, create fake documents to collude and withdraw money from DongABank.

Vu affirmed that he did not share, benefit, receive any percentage, or receive any material benefits in the Bac Nam 79 Construction Joint Stock Company borrowing 200 billion VND from Mr. Binh personally. The discussion and direction of the money was done by Mr. Binh through professional work with his subordinates.

Nguyen Thi Kim Xuyen (former deputy general director of DAB) and 15 other defendants appealed for a reduced sentence for the crime.CIntentionally violating State regulations on economic management causing serious consequences;abuse of trust to appropriate property

In the second phase of the investigation into the violations that occurred at DAB, at the end of 2018, Mr. Binh and 9 subordinates continued to be prosecuted.prosecuteon crimeViolation of regulations on other activities related to banking activitiesaccording to Article 206 of the 2015 Penal Code. The caseTo clarify the behavior of former bank officials who paid extra interest to a number of deposit organizations, related to loans belonging to the groups Hiep Phu Gia, Nguyen Thi Ngo, Tan Van Hung, Dong Tien and M&C.

Hai Duyen