Mistakes due to 'pressure' from phone calls from superiors

On the afternoon of February 10, the court continued to question the defendants and those with related rights and obligations in the bidding violation case that occurred at the Can Tho Department of Health. At the court, Mr. Vo Thanh Thong was still absent even though the presiding judge did not accept it. However, according to the presentation of Mr. Thong's representative, the former Chairman of the Can Tho City People's Committee was not in good health and had submitted a request for absence, at the same time Mr. Thong requested to keep the content of the work with the Investigation Agency.

The defendants in court on February 10.

When answering the presiding judge's question about creating conditions for defendant Hoang Thi Thuy Nga's company to win the bid, defendant Bui Thi Le Phi (former Director of Can Tho Department of Health from 2011 - 2019) said that because of a call from former Chairman of Can Tho City People's Committee Vo Thanh Thong, she felt "pressured".

“One day, the defendant received a phone call from Mr. Vo Thanh Thong, saying that Ms. Nga would come to sell medical equipment and asked the defendant to create conditions for Nga to participate in that bidding package,” defendant Bui Thi Le Phi stated.

Defendant Bui Thi Le Phi said that a while after Mr. Thong's call, Hoang Thi Thuy Nga called her and made an appointment to work. Deputy Director Cao Minh Chu was also present at the meeting. "When the parties were working, Nga said she had met Mr. Vo Thanh Thong and Mr. Thong supported Nga's participation in this project. Because she trusted Mr. Thong, the defendant agreed to let Nga participate in the project and created conditions for Nga to win the bid," defendant Phi stated in court.

Were both the defendant and defendant Chu under pressure because of Mr. Thong's phone call? Defendant Phi stammered in admission.

“Did Mr. Thong give any illegal instructions, or when Mr. Thong said that the defendant created conditions for Nga, did the defendant think this was a secret instruction?” - the presiding judge asked. “Mr. Thong only said that he created conditions,” defendant Phi replied.

Defendant Bui Thi Le Phi.

In addition, defendant Phi requested the panel of judges to consider the indictment, stating that he benefited 3 billion VND from defendant Hoang Thi Thuy Nga. This is something that makes him feel remorseful. He did not receive 3 billion VND. As for the remaining 200 million VND, Nga donated it to the Department of Health as a Tet gift, defendant Phi admitted it and told his family to pay for the repair.

Responding to the representative of the People's Procuracy, defendant Phi once again affirmed that he was under "pressure" from Mr. Thong's phone call. But when the representative of the People's Procuracy asked him if he was the person primarily responsible and knew it was wrong, but still signed and created conditions for the business to win the bid, defendant Phi remained silent.

Defendant Cao Minh Chu.

In turn, defendant Cao Minh Chu said that the indictment had some unreasonable points, because when the incident occurred, the defendant was the Deputy Director of the Can Tho Department of Health. But when the presiding judge asked about the content of being "pressured" by Mr. Thong? Defendant Chu stated that Mr. Vo Thanh Thong did not call the defendant, but only heard defendant Phi mention creating conditions for Nga, because Mr. T. sent it. "As for who Mr. T. is, the defendant did not ask further," Mr. Chu stated.

Previously, defendant Nga presented and requested to remedy the consequences. According to defendant Nga, currently, her company still has many assets and inventories worth hundreds of millions of dong. If possible, she would like to sell them to get money to remedy the consequences. If the other defendants have not yet fully remedied, she would like to remedy the consequences. Defendant Nga also asked the panel of judges to assign management rights to the company and not to individuals. At the same time, she requested to receive back the assets, which are two houses, which have been seized for investigation, one for her sister and brother-in-law, one for her son to look after. When the house is seized and auctioned, her son will voluntarily hand over the house.