The story of "envelope culture" in the "rescue flight" case

According to the prosecution's opinion, in the "rescue flight" case, 21/54 defendants were prosecuted for bribery.

The investigation, prosecution and public questioning at the trial determined that the defendants had received money from business representatives to propose, submit for approval, and issue official documents to license flights to bring citizens back to the country.

During the interrogation, some defendants "vaguely and fraudulently" claimed that they received money because the businesses thanked them.

But the representative of the People's Procuracy said that this is an extremely dangerous concept swap that can set a bad precedent for society. Therefore, it is necessary to have the right awareness to eliminate "envelope culture" from social life.

The representative of the People's Procuracy said that the defendants were doing their jobs within their duties and responsibilities, so it cannot be considered a thank you when the amount of money given is equal to a fortune that many people dream of. It cannot be considered a thank you when the giver is forced to give it, and especially it cannot be considered that the defendants received an exceptionally large amount of money for themselves in the context of people and businesses across the country saving up to donate to the vaccine fund for relief work to prevent the epidemic.

"We strongly affirm that the defendants' actions are acts of bribery," said the representative of the People's Procuracy.

The representative of the People's Procuracy pointed out that the defendants' criminal methods were shown in two main forms as follows: First, the defendants accepted bribes, made requests, made agreements, and bargained on prices, forcing businesses to pay money.

Second, the person with authority in assessing, proposing, and approving flight licenses has made it difficult for businesses to pay money according to the "unwritten law" to be granted a flight license.

On the afternoon of July 19, in the defense of defendant Le Hong Son (General Director of Blue Sky Company), lawyer Giang Hong Thanh also mentioned the "request-grant mechanism" and "envelope culture" in this case. According to the lawyer, some state officials create difficulties and force businesses to pay money in order to create conditions for licensing. If businesses do not pay, they will certainly suffer great losses.

The lawyer said: "So does the business have any other choice? No. The only options are to either give money or stop organizing the flight."

It is clear that Son committed the crime of Bribery. But the defendants' criminal acts stemmed from difficulties that they did not cause themselves. After all, in a certain sense, they were also victims of the "request-grant mechanism" in this case.

Mr. Giang Hong Thanh also gave an example of the case of defendant Dao Minh Duong (Director of Vijasun Joint Stock Company). In court, Mr. Duong stated that at first, the defendant refused to pay the money, so he encountered extreme difficulties.

In his self-defense, defendant Le Hong Son also had to exclaim: "Enterprises are victims of the mechanism of asking for and giving, victims of the envelope culture."

Regarding the defendants who committed the crime of Bribery and Bribery Brokerage, the prosecution's opinion was that: Faced with the difficulties, harassment, and creation of a "request-granting mechanism" by some subjects in competent state agencies, businesses had to pay money to get approval for flight licenses.

The representative of the People's Procuracy requested the People's Court to consider and correctly assess the cause, conditions, and circumstances to have appropriate punishment for the bribe giver.

(According to Vietnamnet)

Source link