[ad_1]
On the afternoon of December 21, the HCM City-Trung Luong highway toll violation trial caused more than VND 725 billion in damages, ending the litigation.
Before the Panel deliberated, the defendants Dinh La Thang (former Minister of Transport, abbreviated: Ministry of Transport), Dinh Ngoc System (former Deputy Director General of Thai Son Corporation, Ministry of Defense) together. say the last word.
Defendant Dinh La Thang
Finally, the defendant Dinh La Thang accepts responsibility as boss, administrative responsibility. Defendant Thang asserted himself and his subordinates to comply with the law, not to commit crimes. Therefore, the defendant continues to assume that neither the defendant nor the defendants who were subordinates are liable for criminal liability in this case.
Defendant Nguyen Hong Truong (right)
In front of the court, the defendant Dinh La Thang explained the long and complicated process of transferring the right to collect tolls for the HCM City – Trung Luong highway. Therefore, deficiencies in the application of legal documents are inevitable. “Doing many things will have risks, there are deficiencies” – said the former Minister of Transport.
Furthermore, the defendant Dinh La Thang took full responsibility for the shortcomings in the Ministry of Transport’s process to sell the right to charge for the HCM City-Trung Luong highway. Defendant Dinh La Thang asked the Panel to consider exemption from criminal prosecution for former Vice Minister of Transportation Nguyen Hong Truong, who worked with defendant Dinh La Thang during the time of the crime. Because these defendants are not selfish, they work for the purpose of speeding up the work. The defendant expects the hearing agency to consider and evaluate the case from a comprehensive perspective to render a fair trial.
The accused Dinh Ngoc System
Similarly, defendant Nguyen Hong Truong (former Deputy Minister of Transportation, former Chairman of the Ho Chi Minh-Trung Luong Highway Fare Collection Rights Price Council) claimed that both the defendant and his subordinates work in a pure and unaffected way. profit. Additionally, the defendant thanked the Panel for organizing the open and transparent trial. The defendant stated: “The defendant expects the Panel to recognize the true nature of the case to properly assess the deficiencies of the defendant and other defendants.”
The remaining defendants of the group are prosecuted for “Violation of the regulations on the administration and use of State assets that cause loss and waste” admitted irregularities in the process of organizing the right to charge high speed rates. . Like the two superiors (the defendants Dinh La Thang and Nguyen Hong Truong), the defendants asked the Panel to properly consider and assess the role of each defendant; thus giving a reasonable and reasonable sanction.
Finally, the defendant Dinh Ngoc System asked the Panel to consider the lower penalty for the defendant and the other defendants who worked at Yen Khanh Company.
Tomorrow (December 22), the court will announce the sanction for each defendant.
Previously, the representative of Ho Chi Minh City VKSND asked the Panel to fine the defendant Dinh La Thang (former Minister of Transport), from 10 to 11 years in prison for “Violation of the regulations on the administration and use of state property causes losses”. escape, waste. “With the same crime above, a sentence of 6-7 years in prison was proposed for the defendant Nguyen Hong Truong (former Vice Minister of Transport); 3 to 6 years in prison for 5 other defendants (former leaders, government officials).
In addition, the representative of the prosecution suggested that the Panel Panel punish the defendant Dinh Ngoc System (former Deputy Director General of Thai Son Corporation, Ministry of National Defense), a life sentence for the crime of “Swindling and appropriating property” 13 -14 years in prison for “Abuse of positions and powers to influence others for selfish ends.” The remaining defendants were offered between 2 and 12 years in prison for “fraudulent appropriation of property.”
[ad_2]
