AVG case, or more fully, is the case of MobiFone buying AVG really coming to an end? The trial is expected to end on December 31, but sentences will most likely be announced on December 28 for all arrangements. The “preys” are expected to be “burned alive” already tied on the “pyre” as Nguyen Bac Son, Truong Minh Tuan or Le Nam Tra, Pham Dinh Trong, etc.
The choir “crying” for Pham Nhat Vu is chanting in unison and the Court is even ready to declare an extremely ridiculous sentence for Pham Nhat Vu.
The parties to the proceedings achieved their purpose, which was to organize a “successful” trial with a form of binding the defendants of the 14 defendants in the trial. At the same time, the case was successfully closed so that no “bad things” happened to other unnamed characters in the indictment.
People will continue to curse Nguyen Bac Son or Truong Minh Tuan without even knowing the truth of the case. Although the name of former Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung was mentioned, everything will be forgotten in the near future because the key of all the problems lies in the two words CONFIDENTIAL and TO LAM.
Which role does incumbent Minister of Public Security To Lam play in this case? The role in organizing the implementation of MobiFone project to buy AVG and the role in the case inspection process as well as the process of prosecuting and hearing this case?
In early 2016, right at the time of the 12th Party Congress, the Hanoi Police Department received a file from a person from the MobiFone 2 center, who supposedly understood and approached quite fully about the whole case of MobiFone purchasing AVG. But he was later fired by Nguyen Bac Son and no longer remained in MobiFone.
The information has been given quite meticulously over the past two years and in 56 pages of indictments and happenings at the trial. That is only part of the case and not the nature of the case. A notable detail is that a lawyer has called the Court for a private trial because many documents have not been decoded. Former Deputy General Directors of MobiFone Phan Thi Mai Hoa and Nguyen Manh Hung told the Court that all their wrongdoings came from the so-called Secret. The files were sealed and went to court, many documents were not declassified, so the overall picture was incomplete, and the trial was only a partial one.
Please disseminate these documents to help readers get multi-dimensional information to recognize the true nature of the case.
On October 15, 2014, Pham Nhat Vu sent Official Letter No. 517 / AVG-CV to Minister Nguyen Bac Son, which stated that Hongkong’s 8206 Company had paid a $10 million deposit to buy AVG for $700 million. This was once again confirmed by Pham Nhat Vu in his dispatch to MobiFone demanding the remaining 5% of the remaining money in the AVG purchase contract. The representative of AVG is Mr. Nguyen Quoc Chien, citizen identification number 001073008351, received money and consulted Pham Nhat Vu to transfer to Vietnam. In this letter 517 / AVG-CV, Pham Nhat Vu would like to offer AVG to 8206 Company also confirmed that they will sign the contract on November 15, 2014.
On November 26, 2014, Deputy Minister of Information and Communications Truong Minh Tuan signed the Document No. 200/BTTTT-VP to Deputy Minister of Public Security To Lam for comments on guiding the offer of shares to AVG.
On December 8, 2014, Deputy Minister To Lam signed Document No. 4352/BCA-A81 in response to Official Letter 200/BTTTT-VP and said that AVG was not for selling shares to foreign countries but only for domestic sales.
And in this letter, Deputy Minister To Lam said that the figure of $700 million is too high.
In general, the Official Letter No. 4352/BCA-A81 of the Ministry of Public Security signed by Deputy Minister To Lam and the No. 200/BTTTT-VP signed by Deputy Minister Truong Minh Tuan did not have any line that denied or confirmed the information about $10 million deposit of Hongkong’s 8206 Company, that it is real or fake. It can be considered that Pham Nhat Vu’s report about 8206 Company’s deposit is real.
Of the 56 Supreme People’s Procuratorate’s indictment pages pleading guilty to the defendants, this information was unavailable and inaccurate, and accused the defendants of failing to test leading to subsequent offenses. But none of the lines mentioned General Lam’s responsibility.
The nature of the Ministry of Information and Communications’questioning to the Ministry of Public Security is that the responsibility of answering and verifying rests with Ministry of Public Security and General To Lam is responsible but has never been mentioned.
To ensure that no information leaked out, on March 5, 2015, Deputy Minister Truong Minh Tuan signed Document No. 44/BTTTT-QLDN to To Lam and requested the Ministry of Public Security to put this transaction into the secret list. General To Lam signed the official letter No. 418/BCA-TCAN on March 9, 2015, putting these transactions in confidential form and that is one of the reasons why this illegal sale was not discovered. This document 418/BCA-TCAN violates the Ministry of Public Security’s Decision No. 961 / QD-BCA (A11) dated August 22, 2006, which regulates the security lists.
On December 18, 2015, then Deputy Minister Truong Minh Tuan signed the Document No. 235/BTTTT-QLDN to the Ministry of Public Security on the price content. On December 21, 2015, To Lam signed the official letter No. 2889/BCA-A61 answering with two contents about the purchase price and business efficiency. Regarding the purchase price, General To Lam determined that it is cheaper than the evaluation of the evaluation units. The function of appraising prices and business plans belongs to the Ministry of Finance and Investment Planning, not the Ministry of Public Security. The Ministry of Public Security has the function of assessing security issues but responded to price and business performance.
Within the scope of this article, I want to clarify the documents relating to General To Lam’s letters to broaden public opinion.
The violations committed by the defendants were caused by General To Lam but the defendants went to prison and General To Lam stood outside the law.
Based on the contents of the indictment prosecuting the defendants in court and the contents of the documents signed by General To Lam, he must be the person examined for penal liability.
The fact that none of the lines mentioned the roles and responsibilities of Mr. Lam and the Ministry of Public Security while tying up the other defendants is questioning, why is this happening? Why was Nguyen Bac Son forced to die?
Does General Secretary cum State President and Head of Anti-Corruption Committee Nguyen Phu Trong know this? Mr. Trong is calculating something or he is being controlled by To Lam?
Is Vietnam operating the society in accordance with the law or in Mr. Trong’s own opinion? Who do you forgive, who do you want depending on whom you really don’t have a no-go zone?
Actually for a rule-of-law society, the trial must be stopped and re-investigated, extended to all relevant subjects such as Minister of Public Security To Lam must be investigated.
Thuy Thuy – Thoibao.de (translated from Dan Luan)
