[ad_1]
Dinh La Thang in court – Photo: QUANG DINH
“Actionable and unfounded accusation”
As the last defendant to participate in the interrogation, Mr. Dinh La Thang affirmed the accusation of unfounded speculation about his responsibility in this case. At the same time, the statements of the other defendants previously had many inaccuracies.
Specifically, Mr. Nguyen Hong Truong (former Vice Minister of Transport) stated that all documents signed by Mr. Truong were sent to Mr. Dinh La Thang, but Mr. Thang cited many documents signed by the Vice Minister but never sent to Minister.
At that time, the Ministry of Transportation had 6 deputy ministers, so each person had each task and assigned work in the field. “With this project, I am not in charge,” Thang said.
For the project, Mr. Thang admitted to having signed a document to send to the Prime Minister to request to receive it back to the Ministry of Transport.
“During the auction process, I only signed 2 documents, then Mr. Can presented me the document, I have a criticism to comply with the law” – presented Mr. Thang.
Regarding the relationship with Dinh Ngoc System (“bald”), Mr. Thang went on to state that there is no kinship, economic or political relationship, he is simply known as other acquaintances and nothing. especially.
Regarding the content, Mr. Duong Tuan Minh – Managing Director of Cuu Long Company – stated that Mr. Thang knew Mr. The system so he should present it, Mr. Thang stated: “The statements in the original file , both Minh and us confirmed Unsurprisingly, I did not submit anything about the project tender. Yesterday, Mr. Minh also told the court in August 2012 that the project was assigned, there is no reason why I called Minh in February 2012. Previously, the project management authority belonged to the ministry, so I had no reason to call Mr. Minh.
Mr. Thang claimed that the statement in the indictment was speculative and unfounded, “many defendants came to court to find out that they did not affect the project, the indictment of inference and guilt.
The president kept asking Mr. Thang if he would call Mr. Minh, Mr. Thang said that it was normal for ministry leaders to call their subordinates. However, the president asked to confirm whether to call Mr. Minh or not, Mr. Thang confirmed that he called but it was not a request. The prosecution confirmed that the call was not correct, so Mr. Thang had to tell him clearly.
“The indictment establishes 6 elements, 5 are incorrect”
Continuing to state that he has nothing to do with this case, Mr. Thang said that the indictment contained 6 contents, only 1 of them partially correct, the rest were not correct.
In the correct content, Mr. Thang said that he is responsible for politics and administration, for example, traffic accidents are the administrative responsibility of the minister, while criminal responsibility cannot be attributed to the minister.
Furthermore, Mr. Thang listed 5 points of lack of foundation:
“First, He attributed the responsibility of the director at all times while I signed only one document, signed a criticism, each specific project, each participant must be directly responsible.
MondayRegarding the assignment of functions, I do not assign any vice minister for this case, whoever is in charge of any field will do the work in his own field.
Tuesday, regarding the relationship, all statements in the presentation and in the trial that affirm my impact are not correct.
Wednesday, the amount of damages 725 billion is responsible for another case, I do not specify here.
According to the regulations, the vice ministers implement the regulations of the Ministry of Finance, if it is an auction project, it is impossible to use the bidding regulations for different inclusion, bidding and auction ”.
