Trinh Xuan Thanh at the trial (Source: VNA)Hanoi(VNA) – Trinh Xuan Thanh, former Chairman and General Director of PetroVietnamConstruction Joint Stock Corporation (PVC), was questioned at court on January9, the second day of the trial on the case of “deliberately violating State regulations oneconomic management, causing severe consequences” at the Thai Binh 2 thermalpower project.
Asked whether hediscovered anything wrong in the signing of the EPC contract No. 33 of the ThaiBinh 2 thermal power project, Thanh admitted that he had instructed Vu DucThuan (then PVC General Director) to sign the contract without reading itsmajor contents carefully.
Thanh said official audit reports revealed that PVC still earned profits in2011, but there were potential risk of losses and a big imbalance between thecorporation’s charter capital and investments in other projects andsubsidiaries.
[Court looks into violations of State regulations at PVC]
He said PVC was one of the five spearheads of PetroVietnam (PVN) at that time,which was tasked with construction work on land. Therefore, while implementing therestructuring plan as assigned by the Government, PVN moved a number of itssubsidiaries to PVC, forcing the corporation to borrow more money to invest inthe companies.Explaining why PVN appointed PVC as the main contractor, Thanh said the BiddingLaw does not allow the appointment of a foreign company as the main constructor.
Thanh said only PVC has sufficient capacity to take the bidding packagealthough there were problems with its financial capacity.
The defendant said that the Board of Director assigned Vu Duc Thuan (then PVCGeneral Director) to prepare procedures and documents for the EPC contract No.33. However, they did not have enough time to complete the documents,especially dossiers for bidding suggestion. Meanwhile, PVN leaders urged thatthe construction of the project must begin as scheduled and allowed the documentsto be finalised later.
Thanh reported to the PVN leaders that the documents of the contract could onlybe completed by May at the fastest. However, under the pressure of PVN, hestill instructed the implementation of the project.
Thanh admitted his responsibility for the lack of appendixes of the EPCcontract No. 33, saying he just read the proposal document on the contractvalue without looking into its documents.
Questioned about the call for PVN’s payment of advance money, Thanh denied hisinvolvement, saying that the PVC General Director was authorized to decide onthe issue without having to report to or ask for approval of the Board ofDirectors.
Meanwhile, Pham Tien Dat (then chief accountant of PVC) said he reported thePVC’s capital imbalance and the use of advance payment for other purposes toThanh and at meetings of the corporation. However, Thanh made no response atthat time.
Nguyen Manh Tien (then PVC Deputy Director General) told the court that hesigned documents asking for PVN’s capital advance under Thanh’s instructionsand on the basis of the EPC contract No. 33. The advance money was spent at theinstruction of the Board of Directors and the General Director.
He affirmed that the use of the advance capital must be approved by theBoard of Directors.
At the court, Dinh La Thang, former Chairman of the Member Council of PVN, saidthe PVN’s appointment of PVC as the main contractor of the Thai Binh 2 thermalpower project is in line with PVN’s strategy to develop into a big economicgroup operating in multi sectors, striving to increase the group’s turnover.
In February 2009, the Prime Minister agreed in principle that PVN can appointits affiliates to implement projects. In that spirit, PVN set up a number ofsubsidiaries to do business in different sectors, with PVC hoped to become astrong construction unit of the group, Thang said.
He explained that as the Government urged the early implementation of the ThaiBinh 2 project, the process could be sped up with a domestic contractor,because it would take time to find a contractor joint venture.
Given this, Thang said he had asked for the Government’s permission to appointPVC as the main contractor.
Asked whether he checked PVC’s financial capacity before assigning it as themain contractor, Thang said all PVN’s departments affirmed that PVC hadsufficient capacity in finance and construction.
He said despite the lack of several procedures, PVN still instructed theimplementation of the Thai Binh 2 project to ensure its progress, as at thattime PVN had many other projects.
The trial will run for two weeks.-VNA
VNA
