A National Assembly deputy of Long An Province, Dang Thi Hoang Yen, is under investigation about her record since she has not included in her profile any information about her husband, Jimmy Tran, a Vietnamese-American who is wanted by police for fraud.
The NA’s Standing Committee has not decided on whether the issue will be included in the agenda of the third meeting of the NA, scheduled for May 21, since the issue is still under investigation.
|Dang Thi Hoang Yen - Photo: Thanh Nien |
Nguyen Thi Nuong, head of the NA’s Committee for Deputies’ Affairs, told Tuoi Tre that “some issues related to Yen are being examined, and we have yet to reach a final conclusion, which will depend on the results of the investigation by concerned agencies.”
“The progress of the investigation is slow, and I personally feel anxious for the results,” Nuong said.
An official from the committee who wished to remain anonymous said, “At the second session of the NA, we reported the results of an investigation of some of the issues related to Yen, and we are examining the remaining issues as well as new ones recently raised by the media. I hope that every issue will be clarified at the upcoming NA session.”
Last year, at a press conference held on November 26, Nguyen Hanh Phuc, chairman of the NA Office, said that the results from an investigation of certain issues related to the accusations against Yen showed that “there were no problems”, and that the office requested that concerned agencies worked to clarify the remaining issues.
Vo Le Tuan, chairman of the Long An Province Fatherland Front Committee, said that when the agency took part in consultative meetings related to Yen’s candidacy for the NA election that was held in May 2011 it did not know that Yen had a husband who was wanted by the police.
“Little information about her husband and children was included in her profile. It is likely that the provincial Interior Department had verified her personal details and then concluded that she was eligible to be a NA candidate,” Tuan told Tuoi Tre.
Sources show that Yen only declared in her profile that her husband was Nguyen Tri Hai, who died in 1989, and did not mention her current husband, Jimmy Tran, from whom she sought a divorce by filing a petition to the Long An Province' People's Court in July 2010. She recently withdrew the petition after the court’s verdict on the divorce case was cancelled.
Lawyer Bui Quang Nghiem, deputy chairman of the HCMC Bar, said, “As a rule, every NA candidate must undergo a process of close scrutiny about their personal details and personality before they can be recognized as qualified candicates.
Therefore, the fact that someone could say that they did not clearly know about Yen’s profile, even when they took part in consultative meetings, means that agencies in charge of verification of NA candidates have not fulfilled their duties and responsibilities.”
Complicated divorce case
Several days ago in the latest development in a prolonged and complicated divorce case, Yen, 53, chairwoman of the Management Board of the Tan Tao Investment and Industry Corporation, withdrew her application for divorce with Jimmy Tran, 57.
Yen filed a divorce petition to the Long An Province People’s Court in early July 2010, and while the divorce case was being processed, Jimmy left Vietnam for the US on July 5, 2010.
On September 16, the Ministry of Public Security prosecuted Jimmy for “abusing trust to appropriate assets” when he was general director of Vietnam Urban Development Joint Stock Company (Vietnam Land), located in the Tan Duc Industrial park in Long An Province.
On October 6, 2010, in Jimmy’s absence Judge Le Van Lam presided over the divorce case and announced that all the assets listed in the agreement belonged to Yen, except US$50,000 in cash that would be given to the husband.
Lam later issued a 9-page verdict for the case but a short time later, at Yen’s request, he issued another one, which is one page longer, to include additional comments from the court about the case.
On January 20, 2011, the provincial Procuracy protested both verdicts, proposing that the Supreme People’s Court cancel the two verdicts and return the case file to the Long An court for a re-trial.
Yen later appealed the protest to the Supreme People’s Procuracy, which later directed the provincial prosecutor’s office to revoke its protest in February 2011. However, the Supreme People’s Court decided to cancel the two verdicts in late 2011.
Regarding its protest, the provincial Procuary told Tuoi Tre that it was due to the fact that the local court had seriously violated civil procedures in hearing and issuing such verdicts for the divorce case.
When asked why the prosecutor’s office later revoked the protest, Dinh Van Sang, head of the Procuracy, said the move was made under the direction of the Supreme People’s Procuracy. He emphasized that his agency has until now affirmed that the protest is correct.
With such developments related to the divorce case, Yen and Jimmy are judicially still in a martial relationship and all the assets created by them remain under the ownership of both, said lawyer Nghiem.