The Legal Basis of Dong Tam Attack?

Specialized vehicles deployed to Dong Tam at Midnight

According to information from “the Revolutionary press” [state media- translator] and “hostile forces” [dissidents- translator], the attack in Dong Tam village was not a land seizure process, because land seizure process should occure in the disputed areas, in fields, and not to be carried out during night. In reality, police conducted an attack in the village, particularly the private residence of Mr. Le Van Kinh at 4AM.

On January 10, after the end of the attack, the Hanoi Police Department issued probe of the case. It means that there was no criminal evidence [Mr. Kinh and other villagers) when the attack occured, according to the Criminal Procedure Code.

There was no probe decision before the attack so there maybe a disagreement/synchronization between the city’s Police and Procuracy? Because the probe needs to be approved by the Procuracy.

Police can launch an attack if people in Dong Tam had committed the crime first and the police defended themselves by attacking the “terrorist’s base.” But according to the sources I have read, the margins, there is no evidence which could prove that people had used weapons to attack civil servants on duty (building fences in the disputed land area).

Activist Trinh Ba Tu reported that Mr. Kinh was shot at his head and heart.
Mr. Kinh’s body with shots at his head and heart.

If the people were against state officials on duty, the police should have attacked the protesters at the place where they committed the crime, the fence building. But the attack by 3,000 troops (according to the words of a policeman wife who works as online seller) was well prepared in advance and the purpose was to attack the private residence of people in Dong Tam, when there were no signs of crime. It. So the attack, mobilizing a very large force, based on which legal basis? The state media or the Ministry of Public Security and the Hanoi Police have no a complete answer. They only give a rather vague reason:

“During the construction process, on the morning of January 9, some subjects had acts of opposing, using grenades, petrol bombs, launchers, etc. to attack functional forces, and against public service executives, causing disorder and led to the deaths of 3 police officers and one opponent and an injure of another opponent.

Old man Le Dinh Kinh who is described “addicts” and “terrorists” by state Media

With the above analysis, based on the evidence published from the press, I found that the attack showed signs of illegal. Therefore, this needs the Judicial Committee of the National Assembly and the Supreme People’s Procuracy to re-investigate whether the Hanoi Police Department’s handling of the case is unlawful, and if the wrongdoer deals with it, cannot blame all of the “addicts” and “terrorists.” It takes fire to smoke. Moreover, it is also necessary to let international media publish independent news, so that people will not be led by fake news on both sides.

Thus, the opposition of the people occurred before 9/1, at the construction site, or they only protested after being attacked?

State media said Mr. Kinh holding grenades in hand!

As far as I understand, the right process of law must be: If people oppose on the spot the land dispute, then Hanoi Police need to probe the case, probe the accused first, then bring troops to arrest violators during day time, with the witness of the local government representatives, and all the process should be publicly. But this was a nighttime attack, just like attacking criminals, terrorists, kidnappers … Then that led to the people’s self-defense, against the police, which could lead to the death of both sides. This means that the police went against the process, attacked first, and then found evidence of a crime later.

Reportedly, Dong Tam people have called for all Dong Tam people to resist the war for weeks, publicly on Facebook, I can read, maybe the police do not know? Therefore, the police should have found a reason for the previous attack, such as the possession of military weapons … to probe the case, with sufficient legal grounds for a public arrest. When they come to arrest people they can fire if they meet resistance.

Here are 11 cases in which police are allowed to open fire, do you think it is suitable for Dong Tam case: -sung-ap-content-tu-nam-2018-3675091.html? fbclid = IwAR3GHivdmEEwfjxNTBk9WeM7h-fYXm6uyMqwOHYQcr6r_sTLnhtbRRtL5VA

In a different development, it seems that Mr. Kinh has never been expelled from the party, he was once a secretary of Dong Tam commune, a veteran revolutionary. State media should use “comrade Kinh” while covering news in the case. Why a party member, former commune secretary, a veteran revolutionary, is feeding addicts and a terrorist (he was holding a grenade – according to Hanoi Police)? Who could believe it?

By Duong Quoc Chinh.

Source: Duong Quoc Chinh Facebook

Trung Nam from Da Nang – (translated)

Bình luận