[ad_1]
Hà NộiLawyer Le Thanh Van, a member of the National Assembly, asked the National Assembly to oversee the Ho Duy Hai case because he thought the appeal decision was not convincing.
– How do you evaluate the decision of the Council of Judges when it rejects the appeal of the Supreme Court of the Supreme People regarding the cancellation and the new investigation in the Ho Duy Hai case?
– I believe that the decision of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court in the cassation session is unconvincing and unsatisfactory to resolve the motives of the Supreme People’s Court made in the protest. For example, the Council of Judges determined that there was a violation in the course of the process, including a serious violation, but said it did not change the nature of the case. Why is that?
The case showed that examination of the scene was not careful, omitted many important contents, withdrew original Hai crime testimony from the archive and market evidence. Why does the cassation decision determine that these do not affect the nature of the case?
I never let my emotions overwhelm my rationality in evaluating the course of this incident. In my heart, I always pray that Hai is innocent, so that Hai really deserves his mother’s dedication for many years to complain, but he also wants the death of Creen’s two dead girls and relatives to be clarified in the strict sense of the word. the law. Evil enemies must be properly punished, but the right people and the right people.
Member of the National Assembly Le Thanh Van. Photos: Ngọc Thắng
– If the cassation decision says that there is an error in the process without canceling the sentence to re-investigate, how does this set the precedent?
– This creates a bad precedent for procedures with subsequent cases. It is not good in terms of precedent because procedural errors are believed not to affect the nature of the case, so it may be subjective, ignore the process.
The authorities cannot say that, because it is the relationship between form and content. The procedure is a formal procedure that is linked to the content and nature of the case. In the past, attorney and lawyer Loseby defended Nguyen Ai Quoc because Hong Kong rulers violated the procedures in the arrest.
I think the National Assembly also needs to monitor the “errors in the investigation process but does not affect the nature of the case” argument of the Supreme Court of Judges, to see the law-abiding attitude of the judges. how the National Assembly elects the Supreme Court.
The Supreme VKSND appeal did not mention that Hai was unfair, but only requested a legal review of the events of the case. Me and many others also requested that the case be handled in a legal and compelling manner, but we did not comment on whether Hai was unfair or not. Too many violations of legal procedures require that the case be re-investigated.
Furthermore, the procedural authority must respect the principle of innocent prescriptions prescribed in article 31 of the Constitution and article 13 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which prohibit subjective reasoning and easily impose the will of right holders, easily lead to injustice innocent people.
– By law, the Standing Committee and the Judicial Committee of the National Assembly still have the right to continue requesting to review this decision. How do you evaluate this possibility?
– In 2015, the Judicial Committee of the National Assembly proposed a review of the case based on the death row family’s request and based on the information base. Ms. Le Thi Nga, Vice President of the Judicial Committee at the time (now the President), came directly onto the scene and raised many unreasonable factors during the investigation process. These are serious violations of the scene examination and regulations on gathering, evaluating evidence, deficiencies in the request for experience …
Currently, I believe that it is still possible to apply a special procedure procedure to review the judgment of the Supreme Court of Judges cassation judgment. In accordance with article 404 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, the Judicial Committee of the National Assembly, the Chief of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the President of the Supreme Court of the People’s Court have the right to request a reconsideration . .
By the exclusion method, the President of the Supreme Supreme Court of the People made an appeal, the President of the Supreme Court was the president of the trial that just happened, so only the Permanent Committee of the National Assembly and the Committee of Justice. In particular, the Judicial Committee was in 2015, so I asked the Permanent National Assembly to supervise this case so that the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court of Justice could hear it again.
The reasons for requesting a trial are that there have been serious violations of the procedures, leading to an impartial review, or there are circumstances that change the nature of the case.
Furthermore, the objectivity of the review of cassation review must be guaranteed since the President of the Supreme Court of Justice, Nguyen Hoa Binh, in 2011, as President of the Supreme People’s Court, signed a non-protest, which confirmed that the case was Right. real crime Before that, Mr. Binh was also Deputy Head of the Investigation Agency of the Ministry of Public Security. A person who participates in the entire process over and over again, the Code of Criminal Procedure does not allow it. The Standing Committee can be an entity that helps the National Assembly to supervise the judicial activities of the Supreme Court, and particularly in this case.
Furthermore, according to special procedures, the Standing Committee has the right to request the Council of Judges to review the sentence. Previously, the XI National Assembly also rejected an illegal case.
– What do you think you need to learn?
– It is a lesson in law enforcement, that is, from the first step of the investigation process to the final stage of the trial. Laws must be enforced, cautiously little by little, especially criminal cases that lead to life decisions; avoid mistakes that lead to wrong judgments, so that acts of protection of justice inadvertently become crimes.
The second lesson is the supervision of the authorities with judicial activity, especially the role of supervision of people and the media. The process must be transparent, with the participation of all statutory members, be equal, open, present from the beginning with lawyers and defense attorneys to avoid corporal punishment, change the scene, change physical evidence.
The lesson on the use of officers is very profound, in which the first stage is that investigative officers must have full capacity to collect evidence and protect the scene. The Ho Duy Hai case is not just about a person’s life. State authorities must release public anxiety, that is, the concern of a powerful judiciary that depends on power to impose its will in the name of objective judgment. The judiciary must independently obey the law.
– How do you personally exercise the authority of the National Assembly deputies to supervise this case?
– I have exercised the right to supervise, I have proposed to the President of the National Assembly to consider supervising the supervision of the National Assembly of judicial activities through the case. I will persist in defending that vision so that the promotion of surveillance activities can be fulfilled soon, meeting the expectations of the people of today.
How this case is right and wrong, first, the prosecuting agencies must strictly comply with the provisions of the law, then evaluate the factors of evidence and evidence and evaluate the constituent elements of the crime.
Supposedly Ho Duy Hai, January 13, 2008 to the Cau Voi post office, where Nguyen Thi Anh Hong (23 years old) and Cousin Van (21 years old) work. Hai developed an intention to have sex with Ms. Hong, but was unable to, she and her brother were killed.
The Long An People’s Court and Ho Chi Minh City Supreme Court of Appeals have sentenced the defendants to death sentences. After many years of not being accepted for the reduced sentence and amnesty for the accused and Hai’s family, it went wrong.
On November 22, 2019, the Supreme People’s Court protested and asked the Supreme People’s Court to carry out the review of the cassation of the case in order to cancel both sentences, but it was not accepted.
On May 8, the Supreme Court of Cassation rejected the Ho Duy Hai case. The Supreme Court of Judges’ decision of cassation took immediate effect, that is, the death sentence of Ho Duy Hai (35 years old, living in Long An) takes effect immediately.
