It is reasonable to return to the questioning.

“Returning to the questioning session after the deliberation procedure has been conducted also shows that the Trial Council is very careful in evaluating the evidence before making the final decision,” said lawyer Dang Van Cuong.

This morning, the Hanoi Supreme People's Court of Appeal continued its 5th session of the appeal trial of the embezzlement and intentional violation case against Duong Chi Dung and his accomplices.

Previously, during the three days (April 22, 23 and 24), the court interrogated the defendants in turn to clarify the embezzlement charges against defendants Duong Chi Dung and Mai Van Phuc (both sentenced to death), both defendants appealed for innocence.

At the working sessions, the court also questioned representatives of relevant agencies to consider whether the floating dock was a ship or not in order to consider whether or not the defendants of the customs group were guilty of intentionally violating the law.

As planned, on April 25, after more than one session of deliberation, the court will announce the verdict. However, due to many details of the case that have not been clarified, in order to avoid wrongful convictions and letting criminals escape, instead of announcing the verdict, the panel of judges decided to postpone the verdict and re-interrogate the defendants and related people.

This morning (April 28), the panel of judges continued to question the defendants.

Mai Van Khang was questioned at the appeal court on April 28.

At 8:05 a.m., the court continued the questioning session, defendant Tran Huu Chieu was the first person to be questioned.

At court, defendant Chieu stated that he initially realized that a floating dock was not a ship, but the regulations for floating docks were part of the system of maritime regulations. When he went to Russia, Tran Hai Son said, "I have reported this to Mr. Phuc, so you can leave all the issues to me."

Responding to his testimony at the investigation agency, Chieu said that there were times when he could not remember. When he went to Russia, he vaguely heard that the floating dock was offered for less than 5 million USD, when Tran Hai Son was also present. "When the survey team came, the defendant reported to Mr. Phuc and Mr. Phuc did not give any instructions but only said to consider it to resolve it quickly. When reporting, the defendant also told Mr. Phuc that the condition was bad, the operation was not normal, so he only bought it to repair it."

The panel of judges announced the testimony of defendant Chieu on May 21, 2012: “If in my report about the floating dock the price was less than 5 million USD, then Mr. Dung and Mr. Phuc could not have signed the contract to buy the floating dock for 9 million USD”. Defendant Chieu affirmed that he had stated so.

Defendant Chieu stated that when he surveyed the Russian offer price, it was just under 5 million USD, but then he bought this floating dock through AP Company for 9 million USD and he made a presentation for Mr. Phuc to sign the contract to buy the floating dock for 9 million USD.

"When purchasing the floating dock, the paperwork and invoices were prepared by the accountants and the defendant initialed them before sending them to Mr. Phuc for signature. It was not until the investigation agency that it was discovered that the procedures were still missing. The defendant made a mistake because he did not review the procedures before submitting the contract to Mr. Phuc to sign.

As the head of the project management board, the documents for Mr. Phuc to sign were all initialed by the defendant. The defendant hopes that the panel of judges will consider the context at that time to reduce the defendant's sentence. The defendant received 340 million VND from Son after paying for the floating dock for about 8 months, then the defendant borrowed 1 billion VND from Mr. Son and Son gave him an additional 340 million VND. When Son gave the 340 million VND to the defendant, Son said, "This has nothing to do with the 83M floating dock, but because I saw that you were in difficulty and I had a profitable company" - defendant Chieu said.

“At that time, the defendant wanted to show his gratitude to his wife’s parents who were living in Hai Phong and were having difficulties, so he bought a house in Cau Giay to bring his wife’s parents to live and take care of them, so he borrowed money from Son to buy a house and treat their illness. The defendant not only borrowed from Son but also from many other people.

The defendant made a report for Mr. Phuc to sign the contract to buy the 83M floating dock to speed up the project. The defendant did not intend to embezzle or profit from the purchase of the floating dock. In late 2008 and early 2009, the defendant borrowed money from Son,” defendant Chieu stated.

The panel of judges announced Chieu's testimony at the investigation agency: "When Son gave the defendant 340 million VND, the defendant immediately thought this amount of money was to buy the 83M floating dock."

At 8:45 a.m., defendant Mai Van Phuc stated that the establishment of the survey team was proposed by Tran Huu Chieu, who was then Deputy General Director and Head of the project management board, and the defendant did not assign anyone to be the team leader.

“The defendant asserted that Mr. Chieu did not report that the Russian company offered a price for the floating dock under 5 million USD, and previously the defendant stated that the kickback of 1.666 million USD was due to Mr. Dung or he must have been the one with the decision-making power to negotiate the kickback of AP Company, but later, at the trial, the defendant thought differently because he saw that Son was so terrible,” defendant Phuc stated.

“In the meeting, Mr. Dung told the defendant, 'If you do not organize the purchase of the 83M floating dock and let it affect the progress of the project, I will report to the Prime Minister to remove you from office,'" defendant Phuc stated.

However, when the People's Court asked Duong Chi Dung about this, Dung did not admit to saying so.

“The defendant’s house in Hai Phong can only be accessed by small cars, but I don’t know if a 7-seater car can. The distance from the street to the defendant’s house is only about 250 meters. Son said he only parked his car on the street, but a 7-seater car can enter the alley of the defendant’s house,” defendant Phuc stated.

The defendant knew Mr. Goh before 2000. The project to purchase the floating dock was part of the construction of the Southern Ship Repair Factory. Deputy Prime Minister Hoang Trung Hai agreed to let Vinalines appoint a contractor to carry out the construction of the Southern Ship Repair Factory in October 2008, but Vinalines had already purchased the floating dock in 2007.

“The Deputy General Director of Vinalines at that time in charge of foreign affairs and business was Mr. Bui Van Trung, but the purchase of the 83M floating dock was Mr. Trung's responsibility, but for some reason, Mr. Phuc assigned it to Mr. Tran Huu Chieu,” defendant Dung stated.

Defendant Duong Chi Dung stated: “It is not good to say, but Mr. Phuc always opposed the Chairman of the Board of Directors, did not follow instructions, and did not buy the 83M floating dock. If I was greedy, I would have worked directly with Mr. Goh, and never shared it with Phuc because I and Phuc had a conflict.”

The presiding judge announced Dung's testimony at the investigation agency: "The purchase of the 83M floating dock, the kickback of 1.666 million USD, Son alone could not have manipulated this matter" then defendant Dung explained: Because the defendant negligently signed this statement, the defendant did not declare like that. The defendant is innocent but wrong.

Defendant Dung admitted that the purchase of the 83M floating dock was a loss due to Vinalines' investment decision, and as Chairman of the Board of Directors, he was responsible. The total cost of the purchase of the floating dock was 26 million USD.

The judge gave the figure after calculating that the purchase of the 83M floating dock by Vinalines had caused a loss to the state of nearly 367 billion VND and 1,666 million USD that the defendants had embezzled.

11:30: The panel of judges announced the end of the trial of Duong Chi Dung and his accomplices this morning. The panel of judges will continue working at 2:00 p.m. this afternoon.

According to Infonet