Vietnamese property tycoon sentenced to death in $27B fraud case

2024-04-1114:53270332www.theguardian.com

Truong My Lan found guilty of embezzling from Saigon Commercial Bank in case that was part of wider crackdown

A prominent property tycoon has been sentenced to death for her role in Vietnam’s biggest-ever fraud case.

Truong My Lan, the chair of the developer Van Thinh Phat, was found guilty of embezzlement, bribery and violations of banking rules on Thursday, in a case that has shocked the country. A total of $12.5bn (£10bn) was embezzled, the equivalent of almost 3% of Vietnamese gross domestic product, but prosecutors said on Thursday the total damages caused by the scam now amounted to $27bn.

“The defendant’s actions … eroded people’s trust in the leadership of the [Communist] party and state,” read the verdict at the trial in Ho Chi Minh City.

Lan was found guilty of swindling money from Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB) over a decade. She had been on tried alongside 85 others, including former central bankers and government officials, as well as previous SCB executives.

The trial is part of a national corruption crackdown led by the secretary general of the Communist party of Vietnam, Nguyễn Phú Trọng. The campaign, which is also known as “Blazing Furnace” and has increased in recent years, has led to the indictment of thousands of people, as well as the resignation of two presidents and two deputy prime ministers.

Lan, who was arrested in October 2022, had denied the charges. A relative told Reuters before the verdict that she would appeal. The death sentence is an unusually severe punishment for a corruption case.

State media reported last week that Lan told the court she had joined the banking industry without sufficient experience and blamed a “lack of understanding of legal matters”. She said she had “thought of death” in desperation, and asked the court for leniency for her husband, a Hong Kong businessman, and niece who were on trial as accomplices.

The verdicts announced on Thursday followed a five-week trial that has been covered in great detail in Vietnam’s tightly controlled state media.

Documents related to the trial, kept in 105 boxes, weighed 6 tonnes, according to VN Express, which reported the authorities had installed security cameras and fire safety equipment to protect the evidence ahead of the hearings. More than 1,000 properties belonging to Lan have been seized, and nearly 2,700 individuals were summoned for the trial, which included 200 lawyers.

Dr Nguyen Khac Giang, a visiting fellow at the Vietnam studies programme at the Iseas-Yusof Ishak Institute, said the case was unprecedented, and a milestone in Vietnam’s anti-corruption crackdown. It was, he said, “the biggest case against a private business, with the biggest number of defendants, the biggest number of evidence and of course, the biggest number of money involved”.

Although Lan did not directly hold executive power at SCB, she owned 91.5% of the bank’s shares through third parties and shell companies.

She was accused of setting up fake loan applications to withdraw money from the bank over a period of 11 years, from 2012 to 2022. The loans accounted for 93% of the total credit the bank has issued, according to state media.

To cover up the fraud, Lan and other SCB bankers were accused of giving state officials $5.2m, the largest bribe recorded in Vietnam. The money was handed over in Styrofoam boxes, Do Thi Nhan, a former chief banking inspector at the State Bank of Vietnam, said during the trial. Nhan said that after realising the boxes contained money, she refused the boxes but that Lan declined to take them back, state media reported.

Since 2021, thousands of people have been indicted for corruption in the country, in what analysts have described as the most comprehensive anti-corruption effort in the history of the Communist party of Vietnam.

Last month, the Vietnamese government announced the resignation of its second president in as many years, Vo Van Thuong, over alleged “violations and flaws” that had “negatively affected public perception, as well as the reputation of the party and the state”. He had been in power for just over a year after his predecessor, Nguyen Xuan Phuc, was forced out because of corruption scandals involving officials under his control.

Evaluating public sentiment in Vietnam, a one-party state, is challenging. However, social media comments suggested many were shocked by the scale of the scandal, said Giang. While some welcomed the state crackdown, others questions how corruption on such a huge scale could go unchecked for so long.

“[The case] might indirectly signal that the state hasn’t really been doing well in terms of managing the system in terms of the increasingly complex market economy and also the state is incapable of controlling their own public officials,” said Giang.


Read the original article

Comments

  • By nimzoLarsen 2024-04-121:025 reply

    The details of this are just wild: According to prosecutors, over a period of three years from February 2019, she ordered her driver to withdraw 108 trillion Vietnamese dong, more than $4bn (£2.3bn) in cash from the bank, and store it in her basement.

    That much cash, even if all of it was in Vietnam's largest denomination banknotes, would weigh two tonnes.

    • By th2o34u32o434 2024-04-122:463 reply

      Typically the bankers are also often in on this.

      Eg. during India's infamous demonetization, it was rumored that lots of bank-managers had struck inside-deals with politicians/industrialists to turn large hordes of cash into 'white' money. It's likely that they also used the new low-overhead 'jan-dhan' accounts to turn cash into thousands of bank-deposits.

      This is not just the 'developing-world' issue; the whole of UK economy is based on such scheming done everyday in the City (and the 'out-of-jurisdiction' isles of the Commonwealth).

      • By qp11 2024-04-124:141 reply

        All Economies work this way. See Pareto's Circulation of the Elites. It covers under what conditions Elites take each other down. And Elites go down only when other Elites want it to happen. Not because of any rule of law.

        • By exe34 2024-04-125:562 reply

          Would chairman Mao or comrade Lenin be considered elites in this case?

          • By tsimionescu 2024-04-126:401 reply

            Of course, at least once they came into power. Violent revolutions can replace the old elites with new ones. It's still not rule of law that took down Tsar Nicolai or the early Republic of China.

            • By exe34 2024-04-127:031 reply

              In that case the original premise does not hold. If you only become an elite once you're in power, then it wasn't the elite who chose who gets to be in power... No circulation.

              • By tsimionescu 2024-04-1211:431 reply

                Yes, the previous poster was somewhat wrong. Elites can only lose power in two ways: either other elites want them taken down (the most common case by far), or a violent uprising takes them down (very very rare).

                Their more important point is that the rule of law doesn't apply to the powerful. For example, a sitting president will never lose their office simply because they broke the law. They can break any law they want, as long as they have the other elites on their side.

                • By kkarakk 2024-04-1213:062 reply

                  i think it holds true that violent uprisings are "allowed" to happen by elites.

                  they may mutate out of control once they happen and change targets but it takes a LOT of "people in power" looking the other way/tacitly supporting them to happen in the first place.

                  • By tsimionescu 2024-04-1216:53

                    I think that does vary a little bit. There are some where it is very much like this, others that are more spontaneous. And it is almost always the case that at the very least neighboruing elites have to look the other way, as otherwise they can usually easily quash revolts.

                    And of course a lot of violent takeovers are 100% directly done by the elites, such as military coups or outside conquests.

                  • By exe34 2024-04-1214:362 reply

                    Which elites would you say looked the other way during the French Revolution?

                    • By mcmoor 2024-04-1314:03

                      I heard that ones who raise to the top of French Republic is certainly not the poorest, more like middle class at most. They are not elites though, but the quote I've heard is that revolutions are middle and upper classes exchanging so it still fits.

                    • By tsimionescu 2024-04-1216:551 reply

                      At the very least, France's neighboring kingdoms decided to let this play out.

                      • By exe34 2024-04-1221:19

                        This whole concept of elites giving their permission for revolutions just keeps getting vaguer and broader. It seems to explain any and everything. It's starting to sound like string theory.

      • By achow 2024-04-1217:35

        > the whole of UK economy is based on such scheming

        Excellent book on this:

        Butler to the World - How Britain Helps the World's Worst People Launder Money, Commit Crimes, and Get Away with Anything.

        https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250281937/butlertotheworl...

      • By Rastonbury 2024-04-148:07

        She is/was owner of one of the biggest banks there.

    • By eco 2024-04-122:032 reply

      If I understood the figures I looked up correctly, she had about 8% of the entire printed/minted Vietnamese Dong currency in her basement (1,352,910 Billion VND in circulation).

      • By throwoutway 2024-04-123:093 reply

        There's a certain point between $5M and 4B where I wold just get out of dodge and buy a new identity.

        • By djtango 2024-04-124:024 reply

          5M (truthfully its probably a lot less) is about the number where it gets hard to participate with the rest of the world without leaving behind a easy to follow trail.

          Buying a house needs a bank account and other things and then someone in the chain eventually asks "where did you get this money?" and unless your answer is "I have owned these sweet shops in central London and empty takeaway restaurants for decades and they unfortunately only deal in cash" then someone will catch you.

          • By nicolas_t 2024-04-1211:17

            Once you reach a certain amount, there are plenty of advisers and ways to launder money.

            There’s more than a few wealthy former corrupt officials having a nice comfortable life in countries in south america or countries like Malta, cyprus etc…

            It’s harder if you don’t have much money (used to be relatively easy with a low amount of money but the oecd has been very efficient at tightening things for people with less than a few millions)

          • By tim333 2024-04-129:43

            Many are the ways of money laundering. $5m is small change. A popular thing for Vietnamese is just sell some property unofficially offshore.

            Russians buy houses in Cyprus. A lot of high end houses in London are owned by iffy money.

          • By stormfather 2024-04-1315:52

            If you treated it like a full time for a year I'm sure you could clean the money though. Especially if you want to retire to a less developed country. Just open a low cost of entry business that accepts cash, and scale up from there.

          • By hinkley 2024-04-126:511 reply

            Run a bar for a few years.

            • By lostlogin 2024-04-128:511 reply

              That’s where I got my first 4 billion too!

              • By hinkley 2024-04-1217:51

                My head cannon is that Cristal exists only for money laundering.

        • By nguyenkien 2024-04-123:29

          She did try to renounce nationality

        • By m000 2024-04-129:46

          You need to stave off greed and the feeling of invincibility to get there. Which she obviously failed.

      • By huytersd 2024-04-1220:00

        Holy shit. Now that’s a statistic. That’s a country of a 100 million people.

    • By aurareturn 2024-04-126:072 reply

      That's not the wildest part.

      She stole 6.6% of Vietnam's yearly GDP in total.

      That's like someone stealing $1.6 trillion USD in the US. Madoff only stole $35 billion for comparison.

      Some might say that the death penalty is barbaric. But I read an opinion recently on this that said death seems like a better deal for this person than a lifetime in the worst prison possible.

      • By aurareturn 2024-04-128:151 reply

        Edit to my post above:

        She actually stole 10.7% ($44b) of Vietnam's yearly GDP in total. The 6.6% figure was the amount that she couldn't return.

        So it's like $2.7 trillion USD in the US.

        Stealing this proportion of a country's money by one person is simply unprecedented.

        • By biinui 2024-04-134:191 reply

          Is there a reason she couldn't return that much? Was it already spent or locked in offshore accounts? Or given to other accomplices?

          • By aurareturn 2024-04-134:24

            What you just said. Some of the money left the country. Her husband was a Hong Kong businessmen. No doubt a lot of money was “lost” through there.

      • By mrangle 2024-04-1214:29

        >But I read an opinion recently on this that said death seems like a better deal for this person than a lifetime in the worst prison possible.

        If that's the logic, then logically she should be presented with that choice. Otherwise, its a morally thin excuse (not yours but theirs).

    • By codetrotter 2024-04-121:411 reply

      Yeah. I still find it hard to visualize though.

      A 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter container full of water would weigh about 1 metric ton. That’s how I usually think of 1 metric ton.

      If I saw a 1 meter x 1 meter x 1 meter neatly densely packed bunch of money bills on top of a euro pallet. I would have no idea if I was looking at the equivalent of some hundreds of thousands of dollars, or billions or what.

      • By mcoliver 2024-04-125:24

        I went through this exercise a while back randomly sitting on my couch wondering how much it would cost to fill my house with $100 bills.

        For your purposes, assuming $100 USD bills, 1m cubed is roughly 71 million USD.

        A 2000 sqft house with 8 foot ceilings, 42 billion.

    • By IAmNotACellist 2024-04-121:13

      [flagged]

  • By Suppafly 2024-04-1122:251 reply

    Why is it that every site with a similar headline is reporting a different amount of billions? Wonder if they are all converting it differently and then using the wrong countries units or something.

    • By alephnerd 2024-04-1122:263 reply

      Because most western news outlets are crap at Tieng Viet.

      The BBC headline is correct (as they hired a lot of Vietnamese speaking journalists, some of whom have been targeted for assasination and kidnapping by the Vietnamese govt [0]).

      The amount stolen was $44B. She needs to return $27B to not be executed.

      [0] - https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/sep/30/bbc-accused-of...

      • By Suppafly 2024-04-1123:10

        >The amount stolen was $44B. She needs to return $27B to not be executed.

        Ah, that's the context I was missing.

      • By josu 2024-04-120:091 reply

        OP's article states:

        >A total of $12.5bn (£10bn) was embezzled, the equivalent of almost 3% of Vietnamese gross domestic product, but prosecutors said on Thursday the total damages caused by the scam now amounted to $27bn.

      • By Narkov 2024-04-120:445 reply

        > The amount stolen was $44B.

        Quite funny that you forgot to denominate the currency here. As a non-US reader (we actually exist on the Internet!), it wasn't $44B in my currency.

        I assume it is US$ ?

        • By CamelCaseName 2024-04-121:503 reply

          This is really so obvious that it doesn't merit a discussion.

          Yes, it is US dollars.

          Why should you assume $ refers to USD?

          Because the US is the global superpower. Trade and banking reserves overwhelmingly use USD.

          No other currency, and certainly none that use the $ symbol, even come remotely close to the USD.

          • By skissane 2024-04-122:35

            In my opinion, it is always better style to write US$ or USD than just $ - it is only a couple of extra characters, and it helps avoid any potential confusion

            I particularly hate businesses which sell stuff internationally who put $ on their website rather than US$ / AU$ / etc. You can’t assume that just because it is an American company that $ means US$, because some (but far from all) American companies detect the customer is coming from Australia/Canada/whatever and automatically display localised prices. And don’t get me started about the websites that seem to be offering too-good-to-be-true deals on Australian hotels until I realise they are actually showing US dollar prices, but $ instead of US$ makes that non-obvious

          • By handsclean 2024-04-122:412 reply

            All that international trade and banking you talk about refers to it as USD or US$, not $.

            To 95% of the world, the relevance and influence of USD isn’t remotely close to their own currency’s. Sure, it’s relevant to some industries and to the larger economy – that makes it like CNY or EUR are to you, nothing more.

            I do think a USD assumption is reasonable, but only because the statement was made on HN, which is predominantly American. USD does not own the $ symbol outside of the US.

            • By tsimionescu 2024-04-126:461 reply

              It absolutely does. If a French person or Japanese person or Brazilian or Russian or Chinese person sees a $ sign in relation to international news, I can assure you they will assume USD.

              Of course, a Canadian or Australian, or New Zealander, or Rhodesian, or Zambian, whose local currency also uses the same symbol, will tend to assume their local currency instead. But they are a minority of the world's population.

              • By 0xFF0123 2024-04-1211:01

                Why not be explicit if there is room for misinterpretation or confusion, which this thread clearly demonstrates?

                Especially on a thread specifically talking about currency conversion.

            • By seanhunter 2024-04-127:45

              > All that international trade and banking you talk about refers to it as USD or US$, not $.

              That is not true. For example on foreign exchange markets "Dollars" means USD. If you want AUD it's "ozzie", and if you want CAD it's "Loonie"[1], and NZD is "kiwi".

              [1] I don't make the rules - FX markets are weird. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loonie

          • By MrVandemar 2024-04-125:241 reply

            > This is really so obvious that it doesn't merit a discussion.

            It does merit discussion. This has been demonstrated. The parent shouldn't be downvoted for pointing out the ambiguity to an actual global population that exceeds the United States of America by some margin. It's not about being a "superpower" it's about clarity of communication and eyeballs.

            Just like the date 04/10/2024. Is that a few days ago, or in a number of months? Wheras 2024-10-04 makes it explicit (in a sane way that denotes a clear hierarchy of values).

            • By MrVandemar 2024-04-1223:03

              I'm guessing 100% of the downvotes are from the "global superpower".

        • By Dudhbbh3343 2024-04-121:531 reply

          Is it? The dollar sign typically refers to USD if not otherwise specified.

          I would consider it ambiguous only if used in a Canadian or Australian context. (Or other country that uses $ for their currency).

          • By Taniwha 2024-04-125:591 reply

            Only in the US, just as the NZ$ is implied in NZ, AUD in Oz etc

            Certainly when the local media here reports on how much Donald Trump has to pay they convert from US$ to NZ$

            • By tsimionescu 2024-04-126:43

              I think in most of the world, $ implies USD unless otherwise specified. The only exception are the few other countries that use dollars, where naturally $ is assumed to mean their local $.

        • By SkinTaco 2024-04-121:243 reply

          Imagine how insane it would sound if I went to a Ukrainian news website and insisted they label their currencies because "some of us are from America (yes we do exist!) so I don't know if this is USD or the hryvnia!"

          You'd tell me to pull my head out of my ass, right?

          • By realusername 2024-04-1419:10

            The Vietnamese newspapers are actually using dollars for their local audience for this case when written in Vietnamese.

            The actual number in VND is hard to reason about, even for the vietnamese locals. When 1 million VND is 40 dollars, that's not helping.

          • By dbetteridge 2024-04-121:313 reply

            America is not the only country to use the $ symbol and therefore it is necessary for the purpose of clarity to ensure you demoninate which dollar you are referring too.

            The location of the news website is irrelevant.

            • By bluefirebrand 2024-04-124:54

              I dunno

              I'm Canadian, I live in Canada, I earn CAD, My whole economic life is in a context of non-US dollars

              But if I see $value in an unknown context online I assume it's USD

              I think it would be really goofy to assume otherwise

            • By zarathustreal 2024-04-121:38

              You’re being intentionally obtuse here, we’ve already established that the context is sufficient to make non-USD assumptions absurd and you’re attempting to further the argument by restating points that have already been stated and refuted

            • By SkinTaco 2024-04-121:411 reply

              Fine, change Ukrainian to Australian and my point still stands.

              • By skissane 2024-04-122:25

                In my personal experience, Australian journalists are generally pretty careful to distinguish Australian dollars from US dollars from other dollars when reporting on international stories, at least in the article body (headlines less so, but the journalist normally has no say in the headline). Of course, for domestic news, it goes without saying that “dollars” means the local currency

          • By Hrnrurj 2024-04-124:55

            USD (and Euro) is widely used in UA. You actually have to specify what currency you will pay with. Foreign currency may get you a better deal on gas station and other shops.

        • By strombofulous 2024-04-121:052 reply

          [flagged]

        • By lambdaxyzw 2024-04-120:53

          [flagged]

  • By can16358p 2024-04-124:318 reply

    The person in question is indeed very guilty but death sentence in 21st century? What kind of an archaic system allows it?

    • By ta_9390 2024-04-129:101 reply

      Civilizations that prioritize the overall safety and wellbeing of society over "individual rights" tend to have more harsh penalities to safeguard society and it does work, and rarely needs to be executed.

      More "liberal" countries have real societal problems that cannot be solved because "individual rights" stands in its way.

      • By lolc 2024-04-1216:461 reply

        Are you saying that systems with the death penalty are less corrupt? That's a funny take especially coming in under an article about one of the largest fraud cases worldwide where the perpetrator gets the death penalty.

        What societal beacons of moral rectitude were you having in mind?

        • By scrubs 2024-04-134:57

          She's executed only if she does not return at least $27b of the $44b stolen.

    • By bufferout 2024-04-124:467 reply

      I used to think the same until contemplating how many destroyed families the drug trafficking penalties of Singapore have prevented.

      • By 99catmaster 2024-04-129:04

        I hope you also contemplate how many innocent people (usually undocumented migrant workers) have been scapegoated in drug trials and executed…

      • By mlazos 2024-04-129:291 reply

        I used to support the death penalty, but inevitably it is used by the state against the vulnerable, poor, and politically weak. If there’s even the possibility of one innocent person being killed, it is a perverse justice.

        • By idopmstuff 2024-04-1216:44

          That certainly doesn't seem to be the case here.

      • By can16358p 2024-04-125:182 reply

        Having drug trafficking laws to prevent (potential) destroyed families is one thing (though I think all drugs should be legal and no government should have right to dictate what you can put into your own body, but that's not the point at this thread), but regardless of the extent of the crime, I think death sentence is unacceptable in any civilized justice system.

        • By lostmsu 2024-04-126:251 reply

          You really did not give any arguments for why it is unacceptable.

          • By SliceOfWaifu 2024-04-1215:43

            Cause innocent people are sometimes wrongly convicted, and sentenced to death. Life behind bars without the possibility of parole achieves pretty much the same effect for public safety, while still giving the wrongly accused a chance to live. There are also rare cases in which new evidence overturns their conviction decades into their sentence. If they're put to death, they never get that chance.

        • By thinkerswell 2024-04-125:32

          [dead]

      • By jbm 2024-04-1217:57

        Context is important here.

        Considering Asia's history with drugs (European imperialists growing drugs in their colonies and then selling them to China to destroy their population), it is completely understandable and a societally acceptable trade off.

        I think after a few more generations of escalating drug use harming our societal well being, we may resort to similar measures.

      • By bitcharmer 2024-04-127:212 reply

        U mean like, people why had a few grams on weed on them?

        • By xuki 2024-04-1210:50

          Nobody is getting executed by having a few gr of weed on them, one needs to actively distributing it and in large amount (500 gr). Singapore is very strict but they’re not executing their citizens for consuming drugs.

        • By aembleton 2024-04-127:451 reply

          Where would you cut off be?

          • By fransje26 2024-04-128:06

            They don't cut off in Singapore. It's death by hanging.

      • By holoduke 2024-04-125:02

        How many exactly?

      • By logicchains 2024-04-125:522 reply

        How many families have the Singapore government's authoritarian policies prevented from even existing, given it's got the third lowest fertility rate in the world; hardly evidence of a place where people feel comfortable to raise families.

        • By vishalontheline 2024-04-126:092 reply

          Hans Rossling's talk, "The best stats you've ever seen" had something to say about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVimVzgtD6w

          Urbanization and education are the two most effective ways of getting a population to have fewer children. Singapore is a highly educated and urbanized country.

          • By ta_9390 2024-04-129:05

            I am pretty sure cost of living is #1 reason and certainly not education.

          • By petre 2024-04-126:302 reply

            I just hope their population will be replaced by the Indians and Indonesians working to sustain their economy. Same goes for Dubai.

            • By squokko 2024-04-126:55

              If that happens, it will come to resemble an Indian or Indonesian city.

            • By ifwinterco 2024-04-1415:38

              This is a bit of a weird comment about Singapore because a significant part of their population is and always has been ethnically Indian (Tamil)

        • By noobermin 2024-04-126:05

          The authoritarianism isn't why sg has a low fertility rate anymore than it being the reason the birth rate is below replacement in the west which isn't considered authoritarian.

    • By aurareturn 2024-04-126:08

      How many people died indirectly based on her actions? She stole 6.6% of the yearly Vietnam GDP.

      Maybe some families were saving up money for a cancer treatment? To start a new family by buying a house?

    • By hereme888 2024-04-125:57

      A death sentence is reasonable in a lot of cases. Nothing archaic about it.

    • By NoGravitas 2024-04-1213:081 reply

      I think every civilized society should execute one of its billionaires once in a while, pour encourager les autres.

      • By lolc 2024-04-1219:55

        I'm against the death penalty for anyone. But this is one of the least bad reasons to have it.

    • By tehjoker 2024-04-124:441 reply

      Well, many states in the United States for one, but point taken.

      • By can16358p 2024-04-125:111 reply

        Then justice system in those states are just archaic as this one too.

        • By tehjoker 2024-04-125:36

          probably more so, they only kill poor people

HackerNews