Floating docks sold for scrap metal also worth hundreds of billions?

On the morning of April 24, the Supreme People's Court continued the trial of defendant Duong Chi Dung and his accomplices for the crimes of embezzlement and intentional violation of State regulations on economic management causing serious consequences at Vietnam National Shipping Lines.

Lawyer speaks in court

Lawyer Nguyen Dinh Hung said that the panel of judges reviewed the consequences of the case, the damage was nearly 366 billion VND, the conclusion of the appraisal was not accurate in many things, if we calculate all together, where can we find the figure of more than 366 billion VND, while the floating dock is in Vietnam, if the floating dock is sold for scrap metal, its value is also very high, it can be up to hundreds of billions of VND, in fact there are ships sold for scrap metal also worth hundreds of billions. Therefore, the damage figure is not nearly 366 billion VND as stated in the case file.

“At the trial, there were still many opinions such as those of the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Finance that did not agree that the floating dock was a ship, the purchase of the floating dock was decided by the resolution of the Board of Directors, the defendants were only the ones who carried out the task, I hope the panel of judges will consider it,” lawyer Hung stated his opinion.

Regarding the act of dividing 28 billion VND between the defendants Son and Dung, Phuc, and Chieu, it is only profiteering and not embezzlement. Regarding the civil aspect, I hope the panel of judges will consider reducing the compensation for the defendant Tran Hai Son.

At 8:20 a.m., lawyer Pham Thanh Son defended defendant Tran Hai Chieu, saying: "I do not see defendant Chieu intentionally violating the law, because Vinalines received instructions and instructions from leaders like Mr. Dung and Mr. Phuc. However, defendant Chieu only lacked the role and level of control, and requested the panel of judges to reduce the charge of intentionally violating the law for defendant Chieu.

Regarding the crime of embezzlement of property against Tran Huu Chieu, the defendant Chieu received money from Tran Hai Son, this amount of money was transferred by Mr. Goh (Singapore), it is still not determined whether this money belongs to AP Company or Vinalines, so it cannot be confirmed that the defendants committed the crime of embezzlement of property.

“The fact that Chieu received money from Son was due to subjective reception, while at the trial Son still affirmed that the money given to Chieu was his own money. If Chieu received money like that and committed the crime of embezzlement, then anyone who received money from Son would also commit the crime of embezzlement.

The panel of judges is requested to cancel the first instance verdict on the embezzlement of the defendant Chieu for further investigation. Now that the floating dock still exists, has Vinalines suffered any damage? If so, we can only say that Vinalines bought it at a high price, which is still shown in the invoices and books. If we want the defendants to compensate, we must organize an appraisal to see how much the floating dock is worth, then we can calculate the damage and the specific amount for the defendants to compensate.

"I request the panel of judges to reduce the sentence for the crime of violating the law, annul the first instance judgment for the crime of embezzlement of property for further investigation, and reduce the civil liability for the defendant Chieu," said lawyer Son.

At 10:00 a.m., lawyer Tran Hong Phuc defended the defendants Huynh Huu Duc, Le Ngoc Trien, and Le Van Lung, former officers of the Van Phong Customs Department, Khanh Hoa.

Lawyer Phuc said that the defendants had followed the correct customs procedures, the customs clearance process is automatic, so if step 1 was done correctly, steps 2 and 3 were also correct.

While defending, the presiding judge, Judge Nguyen Van Son reminded lawyer Phuc: "At the trial, the defendants pleaded guilty and asked for a reduction in their sentences, so the lawyer presented evidence and details to reduce the defendants' sentences, without giving a lengthy presentation because the customs procedures and procedures are already in the case file."

Lawyer Phuc said that it is necessary to clarify whether the floating dock is a ship or not, according to the HS Convention, a floating dock has a separate code and is not a ship. If the floating dock is a ship, the defendants must bear criminal responsibility, but if the floating dock is not a ship, the defendants did not violate Decree 49 regulating the registration and sale of ships. Based on the replies of the Ministry of Transport, the floating dock is not a ship but a floating dock, so the defendants did not commit a crime. The floating dock does not have to comply with regulations on ship age permits, environmental protection certificates and maritime safety. In fact, the floating dock is a repair shop of Ba Son that is over 100 years old but still operates well. Van Phong Customs has calculated enough tax for the import of this floating dock, so it does not cause loss of state assets.

Vinalines' purpose of purchasing the floating dock was to repair it, so the customs had no responsibility to check whether the floating dock could still operate. The defendants' joint responsibility to compensate for the damage of nearly 366 billion VND for the purchase of the floating dock is not satisfactory because the defendants were not involved in the embezzlement or repair costs in the purchase of the floating dock. Meanwhile, at the civil court, the plaintiff (Vinalines) also said that there was no request for compensation and there was no request for compensation in the file, so all the defendants were not responsible for compensating for the damage of more than 366 billion VND. The division of compensation that the court of first instance had determined for the defendants was requested for the panel of judges to consider.

10:50'Ha Thi Thuy Quynh defended the three defendants Duc, Trien, Lung, former customs officers. The lawyer asked the panel of judges to consider reducing the sentence for defendant Le Van Lung because the defendant is suffering from a herniated disc, his wife has cancer, and the defendant himself has served in the military for many years. In addition, the concept of a floating dock or a Vietnamese ship is unclear. The panel of judges was asked to consider reducing the sentence for all three defendants and to allow them to enjoy mitigating circumstances.

At 11:06 a.m., lawyer Nguyen Chien, defending the three defendants, who were former customs officers, argued that the first instance judgment still recognized 83M as a floating dock, so the customs defendants did not violate the import procedures. Because the customs defendants had followed the import procedures for the 83M floating dock, the defendants did not violate the provisions of Decree 49 on conditions for importing and selling ships.

Van Phong Customs' classification of the 83M floating dock goods is in accordance with the international convention HS, the customs procedures for the 83M floating dock clearance are appropriate, and there is nothing wrong in collecting taxes on the floating dock. Through the case file and the interrogation process at the first instance trial, it is believed that there is not enough evidence to confirm that these customs officers assisted Vinalines in importing the floating dock, but they only followed customs regulations and procedures.

In the contract signed by Vinalines with its partner, it is clearly stated that the floating dock 83M was also complied with by the partner according to the international convention. Only Vinalines and AP Company agreed with each other in the contract to temporarily call the floating dock 83M a ship, so the court of first instance could not rely on that to confirm that the floating dock 83M was a ship. Meanwhile, the authorities have also clearly answered that the floating dock 83M is not a ship.

11:36, Court adjourned, 14:00 Court continued debate.

According to Infonet