Will Dong Tam’s department “make the government deal internally”?

No matter how Dong Tam was tried, how many ‘harsh’ sentences were issued, the government and the state have something to learn from this violent conflict, a Hanoi News observer, architect Duong Quoc Chinh told Vietnamese BBC News on Wednesday 9 / 9.

“I think with experience and by observing, I see that whatever the government has gone through and after this case must also be handled internally.

“This will not prevent, for example, some people making decisions to attack or shoot Mr. Le Dinh Kinh, etc. Due to the ‘accidents’ that the police suffer like this, it is definitely the responsibility of It cannot be easily ignored to the leader of the law enforcement industry and there is clearly a professional problem.

“So, I definitely think they will handle it internally, it’s just that they don’t make a fuss. Usually they do the same thing, that is, they correct their mistakes, they don’t make mistakes on the surface, But internal handling, I suppose, can happen to leadership level, not just soldier level, low level. “

After three days of the trial of first instance, which opened on September 7, 2020, there were opinions from the group of defense lawyers and judicial support for the defendants at the hearing to propose to the Court to suspend the trial. , return the files for a new investigation due to lack of evidence to accuse the accused, lack of foundation, lack of conviction and lack of objectivity, etc.

Regarding this development, Mr. Duong Quoc Chinh commented:

“I think that request or request is justified because the Hanoi Police are the party involved in the January 9, 2020 attack, but at the same time they are always involved in the investigation and prosecution.” condemns, so it is very difficult to guarantee fairness.

“So when people suggest another agency, maybe a superior or maybe an organization or institution other than their own, I think it is more reasonable than the Hanoi Police to stand out. Do two things at once.”

In an interview with the BBC on 9 September, the current Hanoi observer said that he himself raised many questions to answer around the case:

“Recently, I have posed some questions on my personal Facebook page about the case and the case of Dong Tam. However, I just answered half of the number nine that I raised, which means that it seems to be the Patriarch’s people. agree whether to buy grenades or not.

“The defendants have received testimony saying yes, but for the grenade attributed to Mr. Kinh, the motives are uncertain to say that it was among them, while the defendants were informed in court that the amount of results that they threw “to scare”, because “did not remove the pin”.

“Through a pistol, the notes announced by the defense attorneys, Mr. Bui Viet Hieu, the defendant in the trial, stated that Mr. Kinh was not holding a grenade and his descendants did not give Mr. Kinh grenades.

“That is suspicious that the grenade ‘was in Mr. Kinh’s hand’ when he was killed was just a forgery, it was also a question mark that I suspected from the beginning and raised and now it seems that This manufacturing hypothesis is correct.

As for the rest of the questions, I have not seen any clarity during the days of the trial, through the information that the official state media has reported on the trial.

“There is another issue that I consider worrying as the motive for the attack. This, I see that the Court or the Trial Panel does not seem to speak, it is said that the representative of the Hanoi Police did not attend. Attending court, or the ‘dismissed’ Trial Panel at the attorney’s request, when the attorney wants to ask about the plan, the reason for the raid, etc.

“Through background information and observations, I see that plan, which the Hanoi Police is supposed to prepare, approved by the Hanoi People’s Committee, but not by the court, the Public Trial Panel. Dad and the lawyers either. they can read. “

The main Vietnamese media and press reported that after three days of trial in the first instance of the case, many defendants had ‘bowed their heads to plead guilty’, ‘apologized for the damage’, expressed ‘regret, guilt’ and Please forgive me.

Commenting on this, Mr. Duong Quoc Chinh said:

“Actually, I think confessing to such a large number is easy to understand. Defendants are very likely to be ‘tortured’, ‘tortured’, ‘forced to bow down’.

“Mr. Le Dinh Cong, son of Mr. Kinh, who was proposed by the Public Prosecutor with a maximum penalty of ‘death penalty’, told the lawyer in front of the court, through the pen published by the lawyers, that ‘ten by being beaten all ten days as one ‘, it can be inferred to see if they are under pressure or not.

As for the response of Mr. Le Dinh Chuc, another defendant in the case and also the son of Mr. Kinh, through the gun published by the lawyer, it is very suspicious that when questioned by the defense lawyer. Where the wound came from, he said he did not know where the wound came from and also said he did not go to the hospital.

“By looking at the clip that the state television VTV and the Vietnamese press released, the public can clearly see that he has a very large head injury, some say that he has lost a part of the box. The skull and “fully concave” were roughly the size of “three fingers,” which meant it had to be seriously injured, not slightly.

“With that type of traumatic brain injury, it is impossible not to stay in the hospital and yet this defendant said he did not ‘stay in the hospital’ and ‘did not know’ where the injury was. It was a very suspicious statement. doubt, although it was his own testimony before the Court because it lacked logic, it did not quite fit. “

The current observer from Hanoi also provided his comments on what he observed through the way the press, state media reported and the dimensions of opinion in the public opinion about the trial and the case.

“I see that the state media is not covering it well, compared to many other cases, they browse the news. Even the most important state media agency is VTV TV, they also give it very fast. short, very unspecific.

“I think it is possible that the intention of the Propaganda side is that they do not want this to get too much publicity, or something like that.

“As for public opinion, I see a division in the evaluation and judgment on the case and the case that existed before and during the last months, cannot be counted.

“This is natural in my opinion, only when I follow up, I see that the opinion of the police defenders, the government, generally does not have many meaningful arguments.

“The argument here is a completely objective argument, based on knowledge, argument, evidence and vision of the law, legal knowledge, not an ideological argument.

“When arguing this matter is purely legal, apart from political or subjective inferences, ideological biases, many opinions in favor of the police and the government seem poor, drowning, or make no sense.

“The controversies on that margin are very emotional, as evidenced by the fact that they soon attributed the accused to ‘terrorism’, although they lacked or without grounds for such a conclusion, although the government’s accusation was not found guilty of” terrorism “. “.

“So, arguing the opposite of opinion is very clear, but one side is clearly not based on legal arguments, science, evidence, etc … but rather on attributing, then there are accusations, colors. It’s the only thing that’s obscene, curse or curse. “

Regarding the level of judgment that the court can declare in the first instance session with some of the main defendants in the case, the architect Duong Quoc Chinh told the BBC:

“This is a prediction from my point of view that people will be sentenced to death, but there is also the case that in the appeal session, if the defendants appeal, they may be to reduce it to a lower level of punishment, like life imprisonment.

“If you side with the Trial Panel, the authorities and Hanoi Police have charged three policemen burned to death, it is a murder case, without declaring a severe sentence, then It may be ‘difficult’ to explain to the police, but it is only an evaluation from the perspective of the judge, not from the perspective of law and judicial science or procedures.

When asked if there is anything the government may consider necessary to learn from the experience, Duong Quoc Chinh added to the BBC:

“I think there will also be many things to learn and review, no no.

“The first is the alleged persecution of the people, I feel that it really does not deserve to be treated like that.

“I feel that those who make decisions in this repression also have a part of responsibility, which means that the authorities must investigate this case to learn from the future driving experience, avoiding an event that when pushed to the same thing happened.

Second, regarding land disputes, there have been many complaints, disputes and conflicts in Vietnam, perhaps the government, the state, will first have to consider reform. and by amending land-related legislation, if not controversial issues, conflicts become increasingly difficult to manage.

“By the way, going back to the harsh sentences that could be handed down in the Dong Tam case, I think it is possible that people are suing, complaining, fighting over land, land related to the government, or are likely subject to influence. decisions to acquire, acquire and redistribute their land use rights to others by the State is very scary.

“Because they are seeing how to handle the Dong Tam incident, but maybe because of their close interests, they are afraid, but at some point, they still have to fight, but they do. How can it be different and can it be avoided if the regulations and policies of the state, the government and everything remains the same, “Duong Quoc Chinh told the BBC from Hanoi on 9/9/2020.