Illustration photo
On 6th March, Ho Chi Minh City People’s Court continued the trial of the Vạn Thịnh Phát case. It is noteworthy that, in yesterday’s morning session, representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office announced the indictment related to the criminal offenses of the accused group who are members of the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) Inspectorate and related individuals.
In addition to the acts of bribery and cover-up by the SBV Inspectorate and the leadership of the State Bank supervision and inspection branch in HCMC (Branch II), the indictment by the Prosecutor’s Office also revealed the reasons why 7 members of the Inspectorate Group and many members of the SBV supervision team in HCMC were not subject to criminal prosecution. These individuals were recommended for strict disciplinary action by the Party and the government.
In relation to the 11 members of the supervision team in the SBV HCMC branch who were not subject to criminal prosecution, the indictment determined that, during the supervision period from 2016 to September 2022, the members of the supervision team submitted over 70 reports and proposals to the higher levels regarding the inspection and audit of SCB (Saigon Commercial Bank), proposing that SCB be subject to comprehensive control and special control, but their proposals were not approved by the higher levels. Only 2 surprise inspections were conducted in 2020 and 2022; however, the scope of the inspections was narrowed down and did not follow the proposals of the Supervision Team and the directives of the SBV.
During their time participating in the supervision work, 10 out of the 11 members of the supervision team received gifts from SCB on occasions such as holidays and New Year with a small value. The members voluntarily handed over these gifts to the investigating authorities. They also declared their misconduct in the supervision work at SCB, contributing effectively to the detection and investigation of crimes. Therefore, criminal responsibilities were not considered for these individuals, but recommendations were made for disciplinary action by the Party and the government.
How was SCB’s situation covered up?
Regarding the violations by individuals in the SBV HCMC branch and the State Bank supervision and inspection branch in HCMC (Branch II), the indictment by the Prosecutor’s Office determined that, as the Deputy Director of the SBV HCMC Branch in charge of inspection and supervision (from 2012 to January 2015 and from July 2019 until now) and the Head of Branch II, Inspectorate Agency (from January 2015 to July 2019), Nguyen Van Dung had the acts of making dishonest reports on the financial status and operation of SCB to the SBV and the Inspectorate Agency. Dung also made dishonest reports on the inspection results of SCB to the competent authority and did not propose inspection measures to deal with the detected signs of misconduct through the supervision work as instructed, thus the timely detection and handling of wrongdoings at SCB were not achieved. Dung received a bribe of VND 400 million and USD 15,000 (equivalent to more than VND 333 million).
Similarly, accused Vo Van Thuan, in his capacity as Deputy Chief Inspector of the SBV HCMC Branch and former Deputy Director of Branch II, Inspectorate Agency, had the acts of incomplete reporting on the detected violations at SCB through on-site inspections. Thuan modified the contents of official documents and modified the inspection reports in favor of SCB. He intentionally delayed the comprehensive control over SCB, did not direct the establishment of an inspection team as proposed by the Supervision Team, thus failed to detect wrongdoings at SCB and apply timely measures. Thuan received VND 1.8 billion from SCB.
In his role as Deputy Chief Inspector of the SBV HCMC Branch, Phan Tan Trung had the acts of modifying the inspection reports to the Inspectorate Agency in favor of SCB. Trung did not propose inspection measures to deal with the detected signs of misconduct through the supervision work as proposed by the Inspectorate Agency, thus the timely detection and handling of wrongdoings at SCB were not achieved. He made dishonest reports on the inspection results of SCB to the SBV and the Inspectorate Agency, did not propose inspection measures to deal with the detected signs of misconduct through the supervisory directives. Trung also did not carry out inspections as required by 17 documents of the SBV, resulting in the untimely detection and handling of wrongdoings at SCB. Trung received VND 1.1 billion from SCB.
Accused Nguyen Tin, former Deputy Director of the Administrative Inspection and Settlement of Complaints and Denunciations Department, Branch II – Head of the supervision team during the period from 2016 to 2019. In his roles as a member and Head of the inspection and verification team for SCB, Tin made dishonest reports on the financial status and operation of SCB to the SBV and the Inspectorate Agency. Tin also made incomplete reports on the detected violations at SCB through inspections and received VND 500 million from SCB.
Accused Nguyen Thi Phi Loan, former Deputy Chief Inspector of the SBV HCMC Branch, also made dishonest reports and did not carry out the required inspections as mentioned in 17 SBV documents, resulting in the untimely detection and handling of wrongdoings at SCB. She received VND 470 million from SCB.
