On March 7, the third day of the trial of the Van Thinh Phat case, Judge Pham Luong Toan, the presiding judge, finished questioning the defendants who were former leaders of Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB) and some defendants who were part of the Van Thinh Phat Group.
Unable to resist temptation
Standing at the witness stand, the defendants, who were close associates of defendant Truong My Lan, admitted that they had absolute trust in Lan.
While the key positions at the Van Thinh Phat Group were given to relatives to manage, the trusted circle at SCB was mostly composed of outsiders. In court, former SCB leaders stated that they were selected and placed in key leadership positions by defendant Lan. Lan directed and controlled SCB through this team.
On the third day of the trial, the former leaders of SCB and some defendants from the Van Thinh Phat Group were questioned |
Some people were able to resist the lure of bonuses and felt compelled to leave their jobs to avoid being involved in SCB’s wrongdoings. However, many others did not.
An exemplary case is that of defendant Truong Khanh Hoang, former CEO of SCB from September 2019 to August 2022. The panel of judges stated that the person who received the highest salary and bonuses at SCB, according to Truong My Lan, admitted that he was fully aware that the loans of defendants Truong My Lan and the Van Thinh Phat Group were against legal regulations. However, due to the high salary he was receiving and his leadership role, the defendant helped Truong My Lan embezzle over 182 trillion dong, causing SCB a loss of over 65 trillion dong in interest-bearing debt.
 On the third day of the trial, the former leaders of SCB and some defendants from the Van Thinh Phat Group were questioned |
Meanwhile, defendant Vo Tan Hoang Van, former CEO of SCB, admitted that he had long been aware of being used as a tool for the wrongdoing of defendant Lan.
According to the defendant, from November 18, 2013, to December 11, 2017, he facilitated the approval of 290 loan applications, causing over 60 trillion dong in damages to SCB. From February 9, 2018, to July 25, 2020, he approved 348 loan applications, actively supporting Truong My Lan’s embezzlement of over 192 trillion dong and causing over 101 trillion dong in interest-bearing debt.
Husband and wife both want to rectify the consequences
The testimony of the defendants also revealed that besides taking advantage of the trust of close associates, defendant Truong My Lan also exploited partner companies to “drain” SCB.
Defendant Nguyen Thanh Tung, former Chairman of the Board of Directors of Dong Duong Petroleum Company, testified that after the COVID-19 pandemic, the company faced difficulties. Following advice from friends, the defendant approached defendant Truong My Lan with the goal of borrowing money to revive the company. Soon after Lan’s approval, Tung was able to borrow over 1,700 trillion dong. However, Tung only received over 400 trillion dong in actual funds, while the rest went into the hands of Lan. Although it was established that Tung had colluded with Lan in creating fraudulent loan documents, Tung was not aware of Lan’s intention to misappropriate assets.
Information from the trial also showed that to withdraw money from SCB in a legitimate manner, avoiding detection by authorities, defendant Truong My Lan instructed defendant Ho Buu Phuong, former Deputy CEO in charge of finance at the Van Thinh Phat Group, to coordinate with a group of company employees, including Nguyen Phuong Anh and Dang Phuong Hoai Tam, to carry out this purpose.
Defendant Nguyen Phuong Anh helped Truong My Lan embezzle over 297 trillion dong (causing losses of over 128 trillion dong). Meanwhile, defendant Ho Buu Phuong assisted in the misappropriation of over 163 trillion dong (causing losses of over 99 trillion dong in interest-bearing debt), and defendant Dang Phuong Hoai Tam helped Truong My Lan embezzle over 171 trillion dong (causing losses of over 57 trillion dong in interest-bearing debt).
On March 7, the panel of judges received a letter from defendant Truong My Lan and Chu Lap Co, requesting authorization for their daughter and grandson to recover external debts in order to remedy the consequences of the case.
The presiding judge stated that the position of the panel of judges is to encourage the defendants to contribute funds to mitigate the consequences of the case. Therefore, the request in the letter was accepted. However, the defendants are required to provide a complete list of debtors, the specific amount of missing assets, and detailed addresses. The presiding judge suggested that the defendants’ lawyers provide additional advice on this matter.
Regarding the funds for remedying the case, the panel of judges will consider and handle them in accordance with the law.
|
“Million-dollar fruit baskets” The presiding judge asked defendant Vo Tan Hoang Van why SCB mobilized over 511 trillion dong, but almost all of it was only lent to defendant Truong My Lan. The judge asked if the defendant saw the bank as a tool of Truong My Lan. In response, the defendant stated that at the time, he had great confidence in Truong My Lan’s talent and believed that she would help SCB overcome the restructuring phase. Based on that trust, when he saw Lan’s loan applications, he thought they would be effective. According to the defendant, he himself was only a salaried worker and did not benefit. Therefore, the responsibility for compensation should rest with defendant Truong My Lan. Regarding the act of giving a $5.2 million bribe to defendant Do Thi Nhan (at that time, the head of the inspection team of the State Bank of Vietnam), the defendant testified that he had sent sealed “fruit baskets” to Nhan three times. When asked if he had done anything to deal with the inspection team, the defendant stated that at the time, he did not know why SCB had an inter-agency inspection team working with them. He asked others and was informed that the inspection team had “good intentions” to support SCB in accurately identifying the restructuring process. When he brought “fruit baskets” to Nhan, the defendant only assumed it was a personal relationship with the bank’s executives. |
Y Linh
