Postponement of Appeal Hearing for Ms. Nguyen Phuong Hang

The appellate trial scheduled for tomorrow (11-3) will be postponed due to the co-conspirators (who are subordinates of Ms. Phuong Hang) filing a request for postponement, which has been granted by the court.

0
113

According to the decision to bring the case to appellate jurisdiction, tomorrow afternoon (11-3), the High-Level People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City will hold an appellate trial for the case of Nguyen Phuong Hang and accomplices.

Prior to this, even though she did not appeal the first-instance verdict, Mrs. Phuong Hang was still summoned to court. However, Mrs. Phuong Hang had already served her three-year imprisonment sentence at a prison in Binh Duong province and also submitted a request for absentia trial in the appellate session.

Ms. Nguyen Phuong Hang submitted a request for an absentia trial to the appellate court. Photo/PLO

According to the information just obtained by PLO, the trial tomorrow will be postponed because the co-defendants (who are subordinates of Mrs. Phuong Hang) have requested a postponement of the trial and the request has been accepted by the court.

In the first-instance trial on September 21, 2023, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City sentenced defendant Nguyen Phuong Hang to three years in prison for abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the State, the legitimate rights and interests of organizations and individuals (under Article 331 of the Penal Code).

On the same charges, defendant Dang Anh Quan (Ph.D. in Law) was sentenced to 30 months in prison; Nguyen Thi Mai Nhi (assistant to Mrs. Phuong Hang), Le Thi Thu Ha (employee of Dai Nam Joint Stock Company), and Huynh Cong Tan (head of the Communication Department of Dai Nam Joint Stock Company) were all sentenced to 18 months in prison.

After receiving the first-instance verdict, defendants Quan, Nhi, Ha, and Tan filed an appeal requesting a reduction of their sentences, arguing that the sentences imposed by the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City were too severe.

Persons with relevant rights and obligations in the case, namely Ms. Dang Thi Han Ni and Ms. Dinh Thi Lan, also filed an appeal.

Ms. Phuong Hang, on the other hand, did not appeal and accepted the first-instance sentence.

EXHIBIT