[ad_1]
Judge Bui Ngoc Hoa – Photo: NAM TRAN
After the cassation trial, the Supreme Court received much information from the media about the trial process in accordance with the cassation procedures for the Ho Duy Hai case. This is, of course, when the case is very concerned with public opinion, so social information certainly occurs. As a Board member, if possible, you also want to provide official case information to the public to better understand the nature of the case.
BUI NGOC HOA Judge
To broaden public opinion, Youth online spoke with Mr. Bui Ngoc Hoa, member of the Council of Judges (HDTP). Mr. Hoa said that independent judges who carefully listen and review the case files must agree to issue the verdict, without any pressure …
Violation of procedures, why not cancel the sentence?
* Key violations that public opinion is concerned about the seizure of evidence by the investigating authority, the purchase of cutting boards to be considered as criminal weapons, leading to the opinion of the investigating authority. Research. So how does the Council agree to reach the final conclusion?
– In fact, not all the cases can exhibit, but are based on evidence documents such as photos of the scene, examination minutes of the scene, conclusions of the evaluation, testimonies of witnesses, testimonies. The defendant and other evidence were gathered to determine if the defendant is guilty or not.
In the case of Ho Duy Hai, the investigative agency based on the photos of the scene, the testimonies of the accused, the witnesses and asked those who saw, discovered (the knife, the cutting board) to buy similar objects. for the accused to identify and experiment with the investigation to determine whether or not the accused’s testimony is based. This does not violate the law.
The first instance and appeal procedures did not identify the knife, which was purchased as evidence in the case.
* HDTP said the new investigation did not change the nature of the case, so there was no further investigation, depending on where to determine that, sir?
– During the appeal review process, the views of the members of the Food Safety Council have been raised with questions about the deficiencies and contradictions in the appeal (such as not picking up the cutting board, the chair; the slow evaluation of the blood types) by adjusting Can these deficiencies be resolved?
At the trial, the representative of the Prosecutor’s Office (VKS) also said that some of the errors could not be overcome, but some of the other errors that the appeal mentioned in the investigation can still be overcome. OK.
For example, determining the travel time of defendants from pawnshops to the Cau Voi post office, evaluating the time of the victim’s death.
The Council agreed that, although there were a number of deficiencies and violations of legal procedures during the investigation process, these deficiencies did not lead to serious errors in the resolution of the case. judgment.
In addition, a series of protest issues were raised, such as contradictions in the defendant’s own testimony, the contradiction between the defendant’s testimony and the crime scene and other evidence documents found in the process. The investigation of these conflicts has been investigated. and clarified, so there is no need to investigate again.
Scenes from the judgment of the cassation director Ho Duy Hai – Photo: VNA
* The Panel determined that the decision to appeal the VKS was illegal, so why does the court still open a cassation review to review the content of the appeal?
– According to the rules, in the cassation trial, the protesters have the right to supplement, change or withdraw part or all of the protest.
In this case, in the cassation trial, the VKS representative confirmed the appeal. Therefore, the Council must review the entire content of the appeal.
Therefore, the members of the Food Security Council have clarified the content of the VKS protest, whether Hai is present at the site, whether Hai has committed a crime or not, to the contradictions shown in the lake. records, violations of the procedural authorities, as well as the motives and competence to appeal of the Chief of the Supreme People’s Prosecutor’s Office.
After the discussion, the members of the Council accepted an appeal from the Supervisory Council against the law, they were not allowed to appeal in this case, so the Council decided not to accept this protest. That is, if the appeal is authorized or not, it is still necessary to open a cassation trial to conclude it.
From a legal perspective, after a decision to reject Ho Duy Hai’s request for a reduction in the death penalty, based on the President’s decision, the Long An Province Death Penalty Execution Council issued a decision to execute the sentence. This verdict.
After receiving the Office of the President on the suspension of the execution of the sentence and requesting the President of the Supreme Court of the Supreme People’s Court, the Chief of the Supreme People’s Prosecutor’s Office completely reviewed the case if Ho Duy Hai was unfair or not. The Long An Provincial Judicial Enforcement Council issued a decision to suspend enforcement of the sentence against Ho Duy Hai.
Therefore, the President’s decision and the decision to execute the death sentence of the trial execution council are two decisions in the procedure for the execution of the criminal trial.
VKS’s appeal based on the official letter from the Office of the President to file an appeal is not true. Because criminal procedure decisions are only superseded, canceled by another competent criminal procedure decision.
The official dispatch of the Office of the President is an administrative document. Furthermore, in the official submission mentioned above, the President’s directive opinion is to request VKS to consider the decision within his authority and to ensure compliance with the provisions of the law.
* Sir, after the letter from the Office of the President, if the VKS does not appeal, will the court review the unfair case or not? How to evaluate? How?
– After the President’s Office sent a written request to review the case, the Supreme People’s Court established an interdisciplinary working group, which includes the inspection and police departments to review the entire case file. .
After the review, including the meeting with death row inmate Ho Duy Hai, the mission reported that there was no basis to appeal the cancellation because Hai’s trial was unfair and not wrong.
Subsequently, the Supreme People’s Court submitted a report to the President and the Standing Committee of the National Assembly that Ho Duy Hai did not do injustice in this case.
Judge Bui Ngoc Hoa – Photo: NAM TRAN
* Some of the contents of the appeal were concluded by the Panel, which are the errors of the investigating authorities. So why is the content of the appeal so illegal?
– The errors in the investigation process that VKS appealed were violations of the procedures, but as mentioned above, these errors did not change the nature of the case, so the cancellation of the first instance sentence and the Court is not necessary appeals to re-investigate. VKS’s appeal in this case is against the law because it is not under authority.
* At the hearing, the Popular Council announced after the VKS appeal, the Ministry of Public Security established a working group to verify and review the case files. This result is used as a document in the cassation session, what procedure is this?
– After an appeal from the president of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Minister of Public Security established an independent working group to reevaluate the entire case. We believe that this action demonstrates the high sense of responsibility of the Ministry of Public Security.
Before the cassation session, the Panel received the report on the evaluation results and invited the representative of the Ministry of Public Security to present this content. We believe that this is also a document to consider the general objectivity in the investigation and prosecution process of the prosecution agencies.
The procedure does not stipulate this procedure, but this is an exercise that shows a very high responsibility of the Ministry of Public Security and the Popular Council used as a reference.
* Clearly, this is a shocking case of public opinion, 12 years has not come to an end, showing too many problems that the investigation process has not yet convinced. What do you think when there is an opinion that charging, even without convincing evidence, cannot neglect criminals, avoid compensation, but will create false precedents?
– The review panel of cassation has considered the case in a very objective and comprehensive manner, including evidence of charges and dismissal. The Security Council found that during the investigation, prosecution and trial, the accused was not forced to supply, mocked, tortured and Ho Duy Hai also recognized him.
At the cassation trial, the VKS representative also confirmed that there was no sign of Hai being forced, bows, and corporal punishment. Therefore, the People’s Council evaluated the defendant’s confession as voluntary.
The customs declaration of contradictory developments on the crime shows that the accused was not compelled to supply or supply, because if he was compelled to supply or supply, the defendant’s testimony was relatively similar.
The Popular Council relied on the documents and evidence contained in the case file, listened to the presentation of the first instance bodies and of appeal procedures, as well as the opinions of the examiners and the opinions of the Supreme Court. high on the trial.
Therefore, the Council concluded that the court of first instance and appeals convicted Ho Duy Hai of two counts of “murder” and “theft of property” as unfair.
Although the investigation process is flawed and violated as VKS stated on appeal, it does not change the nature of the case. Therefore, there is no basis for accepting an appeal to cancel a sentence to re-investigate.
The case has lasted 12 years, the wish of the families of two victims requires that justice be enforced. If justice is not done, then there is no law.
* Does this mean that the Panel found the research findings to be compelling, the trial results also compelling?
– Straight!
The building occurred a murder case abandoned for many years – Photo: HOANG DIP
President “plays 3 roles” objective?
* There are many opinions on the objectivity of cassation decisions when the President of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court, Nguyen Hoa Binh, at the time of the case is Deputy Director of the General Police Department, until the moment of issuing the decision not to appeal. In the case of the case, Mr. Binh was the Director of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and when he attempted the cassation, he took the chair. Can a person who plays three roles make an objective decision, sir?
– According to article 382 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, when the cassation trial is carried out by the Council of Judges of the Supreme People’s Court, chaired by the President of the Supreme Court of Justice.
According to article 53, the substitution of judges and juries is prescribed: judges and juries must refuse to participate in the trial or be changed when they have participated as lawyers or defense advisers. to participate in first instance, appeals trials or to carry out cases such as investigators, investigators, prosecutors, examiners, court clerks … or with motives Another apparently stated that they cannot be impartial in their duties.
In the cassation review procedure, the President requested and was confirmed by the VKS representative to summon people to attend the trial and the composition of the Panel must be in accordance with the regulations.
In addition to comparing the provisions of articles 49 and 53, the Supreme Court of Justice does not enter any of the cases that must be rejected or modified.
In addition, the role of the chief justice is to preside over the trial, and the vote and decision are for each member of the Council of the Council with independent opinions, voting by majority, without being dependent.
For this case, the judges were assigned to study the case within 4 months and the President of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court understood perfectly that it is a case of public interest, so he must thoroughly investigate the case. debug and accuse having a completely independent opinion at trial.
Therefore, we believe that it is impossible to doubt the objectivity of the council’s decision, including the role of presiding judge.
Judge Bui Ngoc Hoa – Photo: NAM TRAN
* The President of the Supreme People’s Court, at the time of being the Director of the Supreme People’s Prosecutor’s Office, decided not to appeal, but now he is considered impartial and objective to sit in the chair of the cassation review session.
– Whether impartial or objective or not, it must be said in accordance with the law, that is, there must be clear reasons.
The period in which Mr. Nguyen Hoa Binh was the Director of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate decided not to appeal against the fulfillment of his obligations under the law, therefore it could not be said to be impartial impartiality. This decision not to appeal is up to the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, not Mr. Binh.
* During the trial, the Council voted 4 important issues with open hands for members. Does the Chief Justice sitting in the President’s chair affect member voting? Was there an opinion if the judge raised his hand, the members gave a different opinion?
– According to the regulation, after listening to the presentation of the VKS representative of their points of view, the PSA members expressed their opinion and discussed.
After the discussion, vote on the content VKS protests. Therefore, the voting of the members of the council is independent, each member expresses their points of view and votes by show of hands.
It is the independent view of each member, regardless of the administrative mechanism between the upper and lower levels. This vote may or may not agree to the appeal. And, in fact, there are several cassation trials with members voting in a different position than the judge.
Therefore, due to the reluctance of subordinate ‘subordinates’ subordinates to raise their hands to vote in accordance with the judge’s decision, it is said to be unfounded inference.
It should be added that the members of the Food Security Council are independent and only obey the law.
* The last time there were many unfair cases like Mr. Nguyen Thanh Chan, Huynh Van Compress and the “cashew garden” case. In these cases of the investigation process, the results of the investigation show that the confession statement is consistent with the evidence that the investigating agency gathered and were convicted. However, until the culprit actually gives up, they can be vindicated. From such cases, with the development of the Ho Duy Hai case, the Panel should be more cautious, sir?
– During the investigation and trial, there are such unfair cases. These cases, although the accused have pleaded guilty, but the investigation, prosecution, and adjudication process have serious violations of procedures, leading to serious errors in the resolution of cases; There is evidence of inconvenience that has not been thoroughly reviewed and that leads to injustice.
In this case, the Food Court considers an exhaustive review, summarizing all the evidence of charges and challenge. We believe that it is sufficient to conclude that the accused is not unfair.
* There are errors, violations of the procedure but they do not change the nature of the case. Is this type of trial a precedent for hearing cases from now on?
– It is important to assess whether the errors of the procedural violation have changed the nature of the case or not. If the error causes a change or leads to a serious error in the resolution of the case, we believe that it is a serious violation of the procedure and the investigation should be canceled. It is a law that not all errors and violations lead to the cancellation of the entire ruling for a new investigation.
We reiterate that omission, which must lead to a serious error in the resolution of the case before canceling the investigation.
