Regarding the disturbance in Nghi Phuong (Nghi Loc): What did Mr. Nguyen Thai Hop do?!

Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop in a working session with provincial leaders.

Meanwhile, on the evening of May 22, when the incident of destroying Mr. Son's house and beating and illegally arresting people occurred at Trai Gao (Nghi Phuong, Nghi Loc), authorities at all levels repeatedly called Bishop Hop to coordinate the resolution.

At around 10 pm on the same day, Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop and priest Nguyen Doai - Deputy Chief of the Bishop's Office arrived at the scene of the incident. But here, Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop did not immediately rescue and provide emergency care to the three seriously injured police officers, but instead directed the Pastoral Council of Trai Gao parish to draw up a report slandering the police force for preventing parishioners from performing mass. Priest Nguyen Doai read the report to the officials, which contained distorted content, but the police officers did not sign the report with fabricated content. When the police officers did not sign the report, Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop threatened, "If you do not sign after 10 minutes, I will go home, and the parishioners will resolve the matter themselves."

It was not until 0:00 on May 23, 2013, to protect their own safety, that the police officers were forced to sign the minutes. At that time, Bishop Hop called a car of parishioners in Nghi Phuong commune to transport the three comrades who were illegally detained at the cultural house of hamlet 13 to the district police headquarters. Only then were the seriously injured taken to the hospital for emergency treatment. Thus, Bishop Hop's presence at the scene of the incident to coordinate in resolving the problem as requested by the authorities at all levels was commendable. However, as a person of prestige, seeing the wrongdoings of the parishioners, Bishop Hop should have stood up to advise the parishioners and save the victims, but he instead set conditions for those who were being controlled, and moreover, were injured and had their lives threatened, to admit to a fabricated incident, which is against the conscience and morality of a normal person.

After the incident of disturbing public order, illegal detention, intentional injury, and property destruction, on May 25, 2013, the Nghe An Provincial Police Investigation Agency issued a decision to prosecute the criminal case. On June 3, 2013, it issued a decision to prosecute the accused and an arrest warrant to temporarily detain Ngo Van Khoi, born in 1960, residing in Hamlet 14, Nghi Phuong Commune, and Nguyen Van Hai, born in 1970, residing in Hamlet 12, Nghi Phuong Commune, for the crime of "disturbing public order", as prescribed in Article 245 of the Penal Code.

On June 27, 2013, the arrest warrant for Ngo Van Khoi and Nguyen Van Hai was executed to serve the investigation according to the provisions of the law. After arresting the suspects, Comrade Vu Chien Thang - Deputy Director of the Provincial Police Department called Bishop Hop and confirmed that the police had arrested the suspects in accordance with the law. Bishop Hop replied: you did not arrest them properly.

(Meanwhile, the Investigation Police Agency has arrested the suspects Nguyen Van Hai and Ngo Van Khoi in accordance with the provisions of Article 80 of the Criminal Procedure Code: The arrest warrant must clearly state the date, month, year, full name, position of the person issuing the warrant; full name, address of the person being arrested and the reason for the arrest. The arrest warrant must have the signature of the person issuing the warrant and a stamp; the person executing the warrant must read the warrant, explain the warrant, the rights and obligations of the person being arrested and must make a record of the arrest; When arresting people in other places, there must be a witness from a representative of the commune, ward or town government where the arrest is made... The fact that some soldiers wear plain clothes is to support the soldiers in uniform - this is also regulated and in accordance with the professional duties of the police agency).

Mr. Hop's statement that the police arrested the wrong person, arresting one person for reporting another person, is incorrect, because in Nghi Phuong commune there are two people named Ngo Van Khoi, one born in 1963 in hamlet 13 and the arrested person is Ngo Van Khoi born in 1960 in hamlet 14. When arresting Ngo Van Khoi, born in 1960 in hamlet 14, the arrest warrant clearly stated his full name, year of birth, and hometown. At the investigation agency, Ngo Van Khoi admitted his crime, so it cannot be said that the police arrested the wrong person. As for saying that they arrested one person for reporting another person, the police also admitted that there was an error in writing the address on the envelope sent to the commune, but when the error was discovered, they immediately withdrew and corrected it, and did not send it to the address written on the envelope. Currently, the family and the church do not have the document that they say the police made a mistake because this document was withdrawn and corrected immediately after discovery.

At the meeting with the provincial police representative, Bishop Hop's request to "release the two subjects to their families" is also an unclear and easily deceptive way of speaking, because the term "release" is different from "bail" and "release on bail". This request is contrary to the provisions of the law. After making unreasonable requests, which were intended to cover up the wrongdoings of the defendants in the disturbance on May 22, Bishop Hop said: I have done my best to fulfill my responsibilities. If you do not release them, I will let the people exercise their rights.

After that, many parishioners wrote petitions claiming that the police arrested people like gangsters and requested their release... (most of the contents of the petitions of the parishioners were similar to the demands that Bishop Hop had made - reporter). On July 11, 2013, the Parish Council and the Parish Council of 4 parishes (Nghi Phuong, Nghi Loc) consisting of 15 people came to meet the Standing Committee of the Commune People's Committee to work with the content of explaining that the incident that happened on May 22 was not an arrest or beating, but that they had "protected" the police officers! (However, it was not clear what kind of danger they were protecting?!). And requested the authorities to clarify the incident soon. On July 13, 2013, at My Yen parish church and Thanh Son parish church, banners were hung with the content "My Yen parish strongly protests the illegal arrest of people by the Nghi Loc district government and Nghe An province"...

Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop on his first day of office at the Vinh Diocese Bishop's Palace.

And the matter became more and more complicated after Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop returned from a trip abroad on August 26.

While the Ministry of Public Security has not made any promise to release the two suspects in the May 22 incident, Bishop Hop told the parishioners that he had discussed with representatives of the Ministry of Public Security and they had promised to release them, but the police and the government of Nghe An province had not agreed. Bishop Hop also "promised" the parishioners: You just wait until September 4, I will fulfill my responsibility, if I cannot do it (demanding the unconditional release of the suspects - reporter), then you can do whatever you want.

It was these provocative words of Mr. Nguyen Thai Hop that became the "catalyst" that created the recent disturbances by some extremist parishioners in Nghi Phuong (Nghi Loc), culminating in a large crowd going to the commune People's Committee headquarters to cause disturbances and insult commune officials on August 30; surrounding the commune People's Committee headquarters and illegally detaining people on September 3; and the riot that injured many people on September 4!

On September 3 and 4, the provincial leaders sent an official dispatch inviting Mr. Nguyen Thai Hop to the Provincial People's Committee to attend a meeting with the provincial leaders to coordinate in resolving the incident that occurred in Nghi Phuong commune (Nghi Loc) and sent someone to directly take him to the Bishop's Palace, but Bishop Hop still refused to cooperate and let the parishioners do whatever they wanted!

Bishop Nguyen Thai Hop at the ordination ceremony as auxiliary bishop
Nguyen Van Vien

As the Bishop of Vinh Diocese and Chairman of the Justice and Peace Commission of the Vietnamese Bishops' Council, are the above actions of Mr. Nguyen Thai Hop consistent with the important responsibilities that the Church has entrusted to him and the outfit he is "wearing"?

Reporter group