[ad_1]
In this case, there were 5 defendants appealing to alleviate the sentence, in which the defendant Nguyen Van Hien, former deputy defense minister, former admiral of the Naval Army (QCHQ), requested an appeal court. by imposition of non-custodial reform or conditional release.
In response to the Panel on the motive for the request to mitigate the sentence, the accused said that the trial of first instance did not comprehensively evaluate the context and cause of the case. On the other hand, the court of first instance has not evaluated all the mitigating factors of the accused.
In terms of context, the defendant Hien said that at the time of the case, the Party Committee of the Central Committee had a policy of bringing defense lands to do business. This policy was assigned by the Party Committee for Military Service by resolution and the defendant himself was the Undersecretary of the Party Committee, for which he was forced to comply.
“Administratively, I am the highest commander, but in terms of leadership it is the collective, but personally I am only a permanent member of the Party Committee,” said Mr. Hien.
At the request of the president to clarify mitigating circumstances that have not yet been considered by the trial court, the defendant Nguyen Van Hien said: “My merits and medals are many, but I told the court so. This is not very convenient ”.
At the trial, the president also announced QCHQ’s confirmation of some achievements in Mr. Nguyen Van Hien’s work. Including many years participating directly in combat on the battlefield. From 1972 to 1973, he participated in the Quang Tri battlefield in the war against the USA, then he was involved in helping the Royal Cambodian Navy build forces and was awarded the Angkor Medal twice by the State of Cambodia. .
According to the first instance verdict, QCHQ was assigned the management of the plots 2, 7-9, 9-11 with a total area of more than 7,300 square meters.2 on Ton Duc Thang Street, HCMC. After being approved by the Ministry of National Defense to convert land for defense into economic land, the defendants in the case lacked inspection and control, leading Yen Khanh Company to seize and occupy the right-of-use certificate of the Earth. , bringing a bank mortgage, causing a loss to the State worth 939 billion dong.
In this case, the first instance panel found that the defendant Hien had the highest role in the Central Government’s land administration, but did not fulfill all his functions; failure to inspect and urge subordinate officials; There was a lack of verification of legality, so they signed documents submitted by subordinates, deciding to place the three mentioned land areas in the wrong economy, resulting in a particularly large loss of money.
In civil matters, the court of first instance demanded the companies that rented illegal land 2 and 9-11, Ton Duc Thang street, and returned them to QCHQ; revoke the certificate of right to use the land of parcel No. 7-9 Ton Duc Thang that has been granted to private individuals to return to QCHQ At the same time, forced Hai Thanh Company (a partnership with Yen Khanh Company) to pay 939 billion VND to the budget, the land use fee on the 3 parcels in the case.
[ad_2]
