Home News Vietnam Proposing to transfer charges against former General Director of Thai Nguyen Iron...

Proposing to transfer charges against former General Director of Thai Nguyen Iron and Steel Company

2
0

On the morning of April 15, the hearing of the case of ‘Violation of regulations on the management and use of State assets causes wasteful loss’ and ‘Lack of responsibility, causing serious consequences’ occurred at Project phase 2 Thai Nguyen Iron and Steel Zone expansion step into litigation, after the Procuracy has the point of impeachment of 19 defendants.

Ministry of Industry and Trade is responsible?

In court, the defendants have the right to argue before the prosecution’s allegations that they are responsible for the VND 830 billion loss case at the Thai Nguyen Iron and Steel Phase 2 Production Expansion Project (TISCO).

Defendant Tran Trong Mung, former General Director of TISCO, was the first to have the right to argue, but asked lawyer Dinh Anh Tuan to defend himself. Previously, defendant Mung was offered a penalty of 10-11 years in prison by the Procuracy because he was accused of having the main responsibility in the case when he did not terminate his contract with China Metallurgical Science, Technology and Trade Group (MCC) even though this business has violated.

Project of production expansion phase 2 of Thai Nguyen Iron and Steel Company stopped construction for many years. Photo: GENERAL WRITE

The proceeding agency said that the defendant should Mung must terminate the contract with MCC, withdraw the advance; report to the authorized person to cancel the bid or to re-bid. However, he directed to negotiate at the request of MCC; sign a written request for price increase of part C (construction and installation) in the EPC contract of the project.

The Procuracy also accused Mung of introducing and accepting the Vietnam Industrial Construction Corporation (VINAINCON) as a subcontractor. Since then, VINAINCON is not qualified, so in 2011, construction has stopped, making the project unfinished so far.

Defending defendant Tran Trong Mung, lawyer Dinh Anh Tuan said that it is necessary to consider the responsibility of the Ministry of Industry and Trade when introducing VINAINCON to the defendants in the case so that they can choose to be subcontractors.

According to lawyer Dinh Anh Tuan, the main responsibility in introducing VINAINCON must belong to the Ministry of Industry and Trade; TISCO and Vietnam Steel Corporation – VNS are only liable for joint responsibility.

Lawyer Dinh Anh Tuan also said that his client only has a part of responsibility in introducing VINAINCON as a subcontractor, so he asked the court to transfer the crime from “Violation of regulations on the management and use of property. water causes loss and waste “to” Lack of responsibility, causing serious consequences “.

Regarding the alleged loss of VND 830 billion, VINAINCON was approved as a subcontractor, the defendants are former leaders at TISCO and VNS declared, they accepted because there was a document signed by the Ministry of Industry and Trade signed by a Deputy Minister. In the document, the Ministry of Industry and Trade said that VINAINCON is an enterprise of the Ministry with good capacity.

“Choose VINAINCON because according to experience”

Before that, in the questioning section, judge Truong Viet Toan asked VINAINCON’s representative, Mr. Hoang Chi Cuong (at the time of project implementation, VINAINCON’s General Director) to clarify the capacity of this business when being introduced to a subcontractor in the EPC contract.

Judge Truong Viet Toan asked Mr. Hoang Chi Cuong to confirm that at the time the bid received the requested documents from MCC and TISCO?

Mr. Hoang Chi Cuong affirmed that he has not received any documents yet.

Seeing “unreasonable”, because there is no request dossier in the bid, but VINAINCON is a subcontractor, judge Truong Viet Toan asked: “Without the request, on what basis for VINAINCON to respond. Asked to bid? ”

Mr. Hoang Chi Cuong said that this is just the selection of subcontractors of MCC, this is not the bidding document!

2 representatives of VINAINCON presented in court. Photo: DO TRUNG

Explaining to the representative of VINAINCON, judge Truong Viet Toan said that the selection of a contractor is also a form of bidding in the Bidding Law, in which the Bidding Law governs; the only difference is that public bidding or appointment of contractor, appointment of contractor is also a form of bidding.

“In the EPC contract, the general contractor MCC has the right to select the contractor according to the method of bidding or contractor appointment. Also in the same contract, the provisions of the contractor’s responsibility depend on the MCC; MCC selects subcontractors on the basis of bidding or contractor appointment. Bidding or appointment of contractors is ultimately regulated in the Bidding Law. Bid preparation will include requirements documents, in which the project owner will require to do what works, how economic and technical efficiency, progress on time, construction design, evaluation of works. What is the project’s environmental impact? Perhaps you do not understand what the required documents are, “said judge Truong Viet Toan.

According to Judge Truong Viet Toan, the selection of contractors, appointment contractors or tenders are all governed by the Bidding Law; In the initial steps, there are bids, in the bidding documents there are requirements.

“I asked to see how the pressure is. Because all the defendants at TISCO declared the selection of VINAINCON, this is an incompetent and inexperienced unit. And based on that dossier of request, how VINAINCON responded according to the required dossier, to see if it is true or not, ”said judge Truong Viet Toan.

Meanwhile, Mr. Hoang Chi Cuong continues to affirm that his business is a subcontractor and has never received the required documents from TISCO and MCC.

Judge Truong Viet Toan continued to prosecute: “So on what basis to sign a three-party contract?”

“Signing a 3-party contract on the basis of the capacity and experience of VINAINCON for the previous works done”, said representative of VINAINCON.

Judge Truong Viet Toan interrupted: “But, in reality, there are things that cannot be empiricist. How do you see the specific capabilities of VINAINCON in this project? “

Please be presented more, Mr. Hoang Chi Cuong said that VINAINCON has done many great projects since the 1960s, such as Apatite Lao Cai, participated in the construction of Thai Nguyen Iron and Steel Area from the beginning, Supe Lam Thao, steel, hydropower …

“Those are achievements, this is not a meeting to raise achievements and reward for emulation”, judge Truong Viet Toan asked Mr. Cuong to focus on the question …