On November 26, at the appeal trial of the Van Thinh Phat scandal, defendant Truong My Lan, former chairman of Van Thinh Phat Group, along with 47 accomplices, made their final statements before the Council of Judges of the High People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City concluded the debate and proceeded to deliberations.
Beginning her final words, defendant Lan expressed deep regret, stating that the case had taken away countless dreams and hopes, not only of herself but also of her accomplices. She conveyed her pain regarding the significant losses, especially witnessing the stagnation of crucial projects like the Mui Den Do… and the waste of national resources.
Defendant Truong My Lan
Defendant Lan pleaded with the Council of Judges to apply a “special mechanism” to rectify the consequences, repay the debts to the state and the people. She pledged that the remaining assets would be utilized to complete charitable projects, including the construction of international hospitals, schools, social housing, and investment in infrastructure for the benefit of the community. Lastly, she requested the Council to consider reducing the charges and penalties for herself and the other defendants.
Previously, the representative of the Ho Chi Minh City High-Level People’s Procuracy maintained their stance regarding defendant Truong My Lan, including a sentence of 16-18 years in prison for “Violating regulations on lending activities of credit institutions”; 20 years in prison for “Bribery”; and the death penalty for “Embezzlement.” The cumulative sentence proposed is the death penalty.
According to the Procuracy, defendant Lan, as a major shareholder with a 91.5% stake and the highest authority at SCB Bank, instructed her accomplices to fabricate loan documents and withdraw funds from SCB for personal purposes, causing severe damage to the bank. Out of 1,284 loans, her group accounted for 93% of the total principal debt, classified as Group 5 debt (uncollectible).
Despite lawyers’ arguments that the defendant’s actions only involved “debt shuffling” and that the money never left the bank, the Procuracy affirmed that the borrowed funds were used for various personal purposes, such as purchasing projects and personal consumption, and were no longer under the bank’s control. The investigation also determined that 84% of the 1,169 confiscated assets were acquired after 2012, coinciding with the period of the defendant’s criminal offenses.
The Procuracy concluded that defendant Truong My Lan’s criminal conduct was pervasive and caused significant harm to SCB and the financial system, justifying the death penalty commensurate with the nature and severity of the case.
Regarding the defendant Truong My Lan’s request and her lawyers’ argument that there are mitigating circumstances for the “Embezzlement” charge, the Procuracy representative emphasized that this is a significant issue that needs careful consideration.
According to Article 40, Clause 3, Point c of the Criminal Code, and Resolution No. 03 of the Council of Judges of the Supreme People’s Court, if the offender or their family returns at least 3/4 of the embezzled property, the competent authority shall consider reducing the sentence.
