On the morning of March 11, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City began questioning Ms. Truong My Lan (68 years old, Chairman of Vantage Power Group) about her misconduct at Vantage Power and SCB.
During the course of one hour, the court interrogated Ms. Lan about the allegations of acquiring 3 private banks to merge into Saigon Commercial Joint Stock Bank (SCB), and then using SCB as a financial company to provide capital for the ecosystem of Vantage Power. In this, Ms. Lan holds over 91.5% of the company’s shares, dominating the entire SCB management system.
 Ms. Truong My Lan in court on the morning of March 11: Photo: Quynh Tran |
In response to the court, Ms. Lan stated that she clearly heard the indictment announced by the representative of the People’s Procuracy at the court. When the presiding judge asked whether she performed the acts as described in the indictment, the defendant replied: “Respected Court, I respect the content of the indictment.”
The presiding judge noted: “The court does not ask whether the defendant respects, but whether the indictment is correct or not?”. Ms. Lan replied “not correct”, claiming that she does not own 91.5% of SCB’s shares as stated in the indictment. In her statement to the investigating agency, she has never admitted to owning this amount of shares. In fact, the defendant only owns 5% of SCB’s shares, the rest belong to relatives and friends both domestically and internationally.
According to the presiding judge, the indictment does not state “the defendant admitted to owning 91.5% of SCB’s shares”, but the indictment is based on collected documents and evidence that determined the defendant’s ownership. However, Ms. Lan still claimed that she only owned a little over 4.9%, and in the future (2022), her two daughters would own 5% each, friends from abroad would own 30%, and friends from within the country more than 30%.
The presiding judge questioned: “How do you explain the fact that all shareholders, legally speaking, confirm that they stand in for Truong My Lan?”.
However, the defendant did not directly answer the question, but requested: “Please let me talk about foreign shareholders – those who only invested in SCB to help. Initially, I tried to persuade them, now I can’t remember all the investors, companies…”.
Chairman of Vantage Power: Invited to restructure the bank because ‘of reputation.’
Ms. Lan disclosed that before merging the 3 banks on January 1, 2012, she was urged by some leaders of the State Bank. “I was asked to call on the shareholders of the 3 banks not to cause trouble, because they were different banks with different leaders, so they had to merge at all costs,” the defendant said. Subsequently, the State Bank asked her to call on friends to invest, in order to hold over 65% of the shares, this group will have a voice to help successfully merge.
“At first, I refused many times because I didn’t have any banking knowledge. But the gentlemen at the State Bank assured me that I had a voice and credibility with the shareholders, so it would work,” Ms. Lan explained, adding that she was requested to call on friends to hold over 65% of the shares and to call on foreign investors in order to succeed.
According to Ms. Lan, those people who were asked to stand as shareholders “were supposed to be shareholders of friends” and she did not know who they were and had never met. Even Ta Chieu Trung (former CEO of Viet Vinh Phu Financial Joint Stock Company, former SCB Management Board Member) who was appointed to manage the shares did not know about it, he only managed them as requested.
The presiding judge argued: “How do you explain the fact that all people who share ownership legally must confirm that they stand on behalf of Truong My Lan?”.
However, the defendant did not directly answer the question, but instead suggested: “Please let me talk about foreign shareholders – those who only invested in SCB to help, with no other intentions. Initially, I tried my best to persuade them, but now I can’t remember who the investors were, which companies…”.
Chairman of Vantage Power argued that she was asked to “lend assets” so she had to use Windsor Plaza 5-star hotel for bank restructuring because “SCB’s assets were very bad at that time”. “Mr. Tuan (Tran Minh Tuan, Deputy Governor) said ‘Mrs. Lan, if you don’t come in, hundreds of people will be arrested’. I sympathize with people, I never thought that I would be here,” Ms. Lan said.
The defendant further explained that after the merger, the management of SCB was handled by the bank management. At that time, the situation was chaotic because she was under pressure to pay 20 trillion VND to the State (borrowed for restructuring), so she only knew how to put money in. Whether there were mistakes or not, she didn’t know.
“If there are any mistakes, I hope the court will consider them, because the people working at SCB were not greedy and they wanted to save SCB. If I say that I am as terrible as described in the indictment – the mastermind, the leader behind the acquisition of SCB – then my family would not have lost all of its assets,” Ms. Lan said emotionally.
Not agreeing with Mrs. Lan’s explanation, the presiding judge stated that there is no magic formula that says “you have to know who Truong My Lan is in order to stand up and help,” and continued to ask: “What do you think about the accusation of acquiring SCB and the bank’s management system?”.
“Please, your Honor, do not use the phrase ‘acquisition, is it possible?’. Every time I hear it, I feel a lot of pain and sorrow…”, Mrs. Lan burst into tears.
According to the presiding judge, from the Chairman, CEO, to the leaders of SCB, all confirmed that they worked according to the guidance of Ms. Lan, including resolutions of the Board of Directors. Even the officials in the State Bank Inspectorate were aware that SCB’s management level was very poor, and they concluded that “SCB was managed according to Truong My Lan’s instructions.”
When asked to explain these statements, Mrs. Lan said: “Some time ago, Mr. Vo Tan Hoang Van (former CEO of SCB) said that. His statement made me very shocked, and I couldn’t sleep many nights. Why didn’t a CEO speak the truth?” The Chairman of Vantage Power also denied the accusation of “bringing trustworthy people into SCB to easily control it” because “if that were the case, they would have worked for a short time and then resigned. Since they resigned, I have had no contact with them whatsoever.”
‘Not instructing the giving of $5.2 million bribe’
The court then questioned Ms. Lan about her relationship with former Director General Do Thi Nhan – Head of the SCB Inspection Team, and the act of bribery.
Vantage Power’s Chairman was identified as having directly instructed Vo Tan Hoang Van to give 4 payments to Ms. Nhan, totaling $5.2 million, and to give money and gifts to train the members of the Inspection Team. From there, Ms. Nhan directed her team members to report dishonestly, not fully disclosing the violations of SCB; intentionally concealing and mitigating the bank’s wrongdoings, and making recommendations to create conditions for SCB to continue restructuring.
Ms. Lan denied the above allegations, saying: “My husband and I have experience working with foreigners, placing trust as the top priority, there has never been any bribery involved. I do not know anything about defendant Nhan, nor did I instruct the giving of bribes to her and Mr. Hung (Deputy Head of the State Bank Inspectorate).”
According to Ms. Lan, it was Van and Dinh Van Thanh (Chairman of the SCB Board of Directors) who asked her to work with Nhan as “an inspector in order for foreign investors to come in”.
‘Not misappropriating VND 304,000 billion’
Similarly, Ms. Lan also denied instructing multiple people to set up phantom companies, hire legal entities, and appraisal companies to overstate collateral assets to create loan files, withdraw money from SCB, and then use a portion of the money for her own use…
About the accusation of misappropriating 304 trillion VND from SCB, Ms. Lan said she had contributed a lot of assets and money to the bank. “Would I take away my own money? There has never been anything like that,” the defendant argued, while also requesting the court to carefully examine the calculations, reasons, and context of the case.
Mr. Nguyen Cao Tri, Chairman of Capella Group – the last person to be questioned today. Photo: Quynh Tran
|
Ms. Lan was accused of directing close associates at Vantage Power to collaborate with key SCB personnel to disburse over 2,500 loans totaling over 1,066,000 trillion dong to her own group of customers.
In this, from 2012 to 2017, Ms. Lan instructed the creation of falsified files for 304 customers who borrowed 368 times. As of 2022, these loans still had a remaining debt of over 132 trillion dong, including principal and interest. After deducting from the collateral assets, these loans caused a loss of 64,600 trillion dong. This conduct of Ms. Lan and her accomplices is determined as Violating the regulations on lending activities of credit institutions.
In addition, from February 2018 to October 2022, Ms. Lan instructed the falsification of 916 loan files, borrowing 545,000 trillion dong from SCB and misappropriating 304,000 trillion dong; causing nearly 130,000 trillion dong in generated interest losses. This conduct is identified as Misappropriation of assets.
The determination of the charges against Ms. Lan is divided into two stages corresponding to the two offenses based on the effectiveness of the 2015 Penal Code. The criminal offenses committed by Ms. Lan and her accomplices lasted for a long time, while the 2015 Penal Code changed the approach to handling violations occurring before and after January 1, 2018.
In particular, before January 1, 2018, the 2015 Penal Code did not provide regulations on embezzlement in the private sector, SCB was a joint-stock bank without state capital. Therefore, the criminal acts committed by Ms. Lan and her accomplices after January 1, 2018, are processed for the offenses of Embezzlement of assets and Violation of regulations on banking activities, according to the 2015 Penal Code.
Hai Duyen – Quoc Thang
