Human Rights in Viet Nam - Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions

The record of correspondence for 2007 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, A/HRC/4/20/Add.1.

Viet Nam: Death Sentence of Nguyen Thi Quynh Van

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of Viet Nam and welcomes the information that Nguyen Thi Quynh Van will not face the death penalty.

I would like to draw the attention of your Government to information I have received regarding Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van, who reportedly could face the death penalty if she is found guilty of “losing state resources through economic mismanagement”, a crime which I understand carries the death penalty in Vietnam.

According to the information received, Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van is a former deputy head of trade finance at the Industrial and Commercial Bank of Vietnam, known as Incombank. Authorities maintain that she lost US$5.4 million in speculative currency trades made with three foreign banks that do business in Vietnam. The State and Incombank also claim that Ms. Van was not authorized to undertake foreign-exchange transactions and that her conduct represents mismanagement of funds. The Police reportedly charged her with "losing state resources through economic mismanagement", a crime that carries the death penalty in Vietnam.

I understand that 11 high-ranking officials and business people were sentenced to death for economic crimes by Vietnamese courts in the last three years. The last known execution was reportedly carried out in March 2006 on Mr. Phung Long That, head of the Customs Department's anti-smuggling office, who was found guilty of accepting bribes and smuggling.

If the information I have received is accurate, there would be grounds for serious concern and compelling grounds to challenge Ms Nguyen Thi Quynh Van’s death sentence as being incompatible with the international obligations of Vietnam. In this connection, I would like to bring your Excellency’s attention to article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that states that "in countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious of crimes (…)". In this regard the UN Human Rights Commission has repeatedly stated that economic crimes do not fall within the "most serious crimes". In its resolution 2005/59 on the question of the death penalty adopted on 20 April 2005 at its 61st session, the Commission called on states "To ensure that the notion of “most serious crimes” (…) is not imposed for non-violent acts such as financial crimes”.

I have been informed that in February 2006 the Ministry of Public Security proposed a reduction in the number of offences punishable by the death penalty. The proposal, which has been submitted to the central judicial reform commission for consideration, reportedly recommends that economic crimes such as fraud and embezzlement, smuggling, counterfeiting and bribery should no longer be capital offences. I would like to express my very strong support for this initiative and remind your Excellency’s Government that all efforts to fight against economic crimes should be undertaken within the framework of recognized international human rights standards.

In view of the urgency of the matter, I would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government to safeguard the rights of Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van, in accordance with its obligations under international law.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Human Rights Council, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

2. Please provide a detailed description of the crimes with which Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van has been charged.

3. Please provide a description of the process that will be followed in the trial of Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van, so as to enable me to assess whether the proceedings comply with international standards relating the imposition of capital punishment.

Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van is a former Deputy Head of Trade Finance of the Hai Phong Industrial and Commercial Bank (Incombank). Ms. Van was born on 23/03/1970 in Ha Tay Province. Her permanent residence is in Nghia Tan Commune, Cau Giay District, Hanoi Capital. Her current résidence is in An Bien Commune, Le Chan District, Hai Phong City.

On 03/03/2006, the Police Agency for Investigation made an introduction of. instance against a criminal case occurred at the Hai Phong Incombank, and also made at the same time an introduction of instance against the arrestee, Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van on charge of "intentionally breaching State Regulations on economic management, causing serious consequences" (Article 165 of the 1999 Penal Code). Later, on 20/4/2006, the Police Agency for Investigation .issued another décision supplementing the previous one, adding one more crime: "making corrupt use of. position and power while executing public services” (Article 281 of the 1999 Penal code), and at the same, this additional crime was also charged against Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van.

Currently, this case is under investigation process, and Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van is provisionally detained in line with provisions of the 1999 Penal Code. The investigation, provisional detention are strictly carried out in accordance with rules of procedures stipulated by laws. In accordance with the provisions of the 1999 Penal Code of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, the two above-mentioned crimes have to face with the maximum punishment framework of 20 and 15 years of imprisonment, respectively.

Thorefore, the alleged information about crimes caused by, and level of punishment against Ms. Nguyen Thi Quynh Van as summarised in the above-mentioned Communication. are not factual.

Correspondence from 2006

The record of correspondence for 2006 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1.

Viet Nam: Death Sentence of Tran Van Thanh

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 male

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of Viet Nam and has taken note of information from other sources that the death penalty in this case was commuted in August 2005.

Urgent appeal sent on 8 March 2005

Mr. Tran Van Thanh, a 39-year-old Australian of Vietnamese origin was reportedly sentenced to death on charges of drug trafficking by the Ho Chi Minh City’s People Court on 5 November 2004. According to the information received, he was a member of a gang accused of trafficking heroin from Viet Nam to Australia between February and June 2003. Two of his accomplices, also Australians, reportedly received life imprisonment while two Vietnamese nationals received 16 and 20 years in prison. They were all reportedly arrested in June 2003.

According to international standards, the death penalty should only be imposed for the most serious crimes. This is reflected in Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Vietnam is a State party. It provides that “in countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes”. In its General Comment No. 6, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated that “the expression “most serious crimes” must be read restrictively to mean that the death penalty should be a quite exceptional measure”. This approach conforms with paragraph 1 of the Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty, Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984, which provides that capital punishment may be imposed only for the most serious crimes. It is understood that these should only include intentional crimes with lethal or extremely grave consequences.

I have been informed that the death penalty for drug-related offences was introduced in December 1992 under Article 96 a of the Criminal Code as an optional punishment for the offence of “illegally manufacturing, concealing, trafficking in or transporting narcotic substances in a manner contrary to state regulations when the offence is committed in particularly serious circumstances”. Concerns have been expressed that at least one third of all publicized death sentences are imposed for drug-related crimes and that the great majority of these would not appear to fall into the category of the most serious crimes.

In this connection, I would like to take this opportunity to respectfully remind your Excellency’s Government of the Human Rights Committee’s Concluding Observations published in July 2002, following consideration of Viet Nam’s State party report on implementation of the ICCPR, in which the Committee stated that it remained “concerned with the large number of crimes for which the death penalty may still be imposed.” The Committee added that “The penalty does not appear to be restricted only to those crimes that are considered as the most serious ones” and recommended that “The State party should continue to review the list of crimes for which the death penalty may be imposed in order to reduce and limit these to crimes which may be strictly considered as the most serious crimes, as required by article 6, paragraph 2 …” (See CCPR/CO/75/VNM, at paragraph 7).

In view of the urgency of the matter, I would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government to safeguard the rights of the above-mentioned person, in accordance with the State Party’s relevant obligations under international law.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights, and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all such cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Commission I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations. I undertake to ensure that your Government’s response is accurately reflected in the reports I will submit to the Commission on Human Rights for its consideration.

Response of the Government of Viet Nam dated 10 May 2005

Tran Van Thanh was caught red handed together with his accomplices in trafficking heroin from Viet Nam to Australia (the amount of 682,7 grams of heroin). In so doing, Thanh committed an extremely serious crime in violation of the Article 96 of the Penal Code of Viet Nam. Therefore, Thanh was put on trial of first instance in November 2004 by the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City and was sentenced to death. Due to his very serious crime, Thanh’s death sentence was upheld by the People’s Supreme Court at the final trial on 21 March 2005 in Ho Chi Minh City.

Correspondence from 2005

The record of correspondence for 2005 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal sent with Chairman Rapporteur of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, 15 January 2004. Christians who belong to the Montagnard Degar, a group which identifies itself as indigenous, in the Central Highlands. According to the information received, on 21 December 2003, eight trucks of paramilitary police surrounded the village of Plei Todrah, commune of Bongong, Cu Se district, Gia Lai province in order to capture Christians who were reported to be hiding in the area. During this incident, the police arrested Jum, Huit, Teng and Thoi, members of the Christian community, who were hiding in the house of Hram, Won and Oh. The police tied them up and reportedly beat and kick them in front of the villagers. It is reported that they were later pulled around the village were later thrown on the back of the trucks and taken away. Fears have been expressed for their safety and physical integrity.

It is furthermore reported that Ham, Won and Oh, who had helped the four above mentioned individuals, went into hiding after the police completely destroyed their house. If arrested, their lives could be at risk. On the same day, the police reportedly arrested two other Christians, Hlo, from the village of Plei Pheo, commune of Bongong, Cu Se district, Gia Lai province and Hua, from the village of Plei Brong Guai, commune Ia Pet, Dak Dao district, Gia Lai province. According to the information received, they were publicly beaten and kicked by police officers.

On 22 December 2003, a Christian named Y Bun Ayun, 24 years old, from Buon U village, Dak Lac province went to the police station at Cu Jut District to ask for the Government’s permission to celebrate Christmas. It was reported that the police, however, arrested him. He was beaten and subjected to electric shocks was told told not to follow the Christian religion. He was eventually released two days later.

Government reply: Response dated 3 April 2004. The Government of the Social Republic of Vietnam indicates that all allegations are false and are sheer fabrications. According to the Government, in Vietnam the rights to freedom of religion or belief are ensured. No one is arrested and detained on religious grounds. Torture and other forms of inhumane treatment are forbidden. These are clearly enshrined in the Constitution and laws and are strictly observed in practice.Only those who violate the law are treated in accordance with the rules and procedures provided by the law. In relation to the cases mentioned in the communications, the Government indicates that: Jum, whose real name is Dihn Jum; Huit, whose real name is Dihn Huit; Hoa, whose real name is Rlan Hoa and Hlo, whose real name is Dinh Hlo were all arrested for acts undermining the policy of national solidarity and unity. They were released on 29 December 2003. He was captured for the same reason as Dihn Jum.Teng, whose real name is Dihn Teng. According to the Governemnt, Y Bun and Ham, Wo and Oh, whose real names respectively are Hram, Won and Ot live a normal life in the community.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply.

Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation sent with the Special Rappporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on torture, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders and Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, 22 April 2004. According to the information received, on 10 and 11 April on the occasion of Easter celebrations, between 10 and 30 thousands Christian members of the Degar tribe gathered in the cities of Buon Ma Tuor, Kontum, Dalat, Phuoc Long and Plei Ku as well as in other areas, to protest the on-going repression against hill tribes and violations of their human rights, including their right to freedom of religion, by the authorities. The demonstraters who were reportedly not armed were violently suppressed by the Vietnamese authorities, reportedly causing a yet undetermined number of casualties. Although exact figures of the casualties are difficult to assess, as it is reported that the authorities are still barring access to the area by independent observers and have imposed a news blackout on hospital personnel, some reports mention that at least 10 Montagnards were killed, including one from a gunshot wound in the head and others from beatings; hundrerds were allegedly wounded. Further reports indicate that hundreds of Montagnards have fled their villages and have gone into hiding.

Government reply: Response dated 14 May 2004. According to the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the allegations in some areas in the Central highlands in April 2004 are untrue, and sheer fabrications by forces hostile to Vietnam. On 10 and 11 April 2004, some extremist elements in localities in Dak lak and Gia Lai provinces, with instigation and instructions from outside, especially from the Montagnard Foundation led by Ksor Kok, induced deceived and forced the local people to carry out demonstrations. The extremists committed acts that caused public disorder. They used dangerous weapons to beat on-duty officers, causing serious injuries. They destroyed public works and property in some communes. More seriously they even dared to attack some commune headquarters, capture local officials and hang out banners demanding to establish a “Dega state”. It was clear that these were acts aimed at causing public disorder, dividing people of the Central Highlands, damaging the national great unity and undermining Vietnam’s territorial integrity. In the face of such violent acts of the extremists, law enforcement forces and people had to take defensive acts. The local authorities have taken measures to stabilize the situation. People who had been deceived to take part in the demonstrations were explained by the local authorities about the issue and provided with means of transportation to go back home. The local governments just hold in custody the instigators, leaders and those who committed acts against public officers who were on duty. At present the life in these areas is normal. Recently a UN working team, officials from a number of embassies in Ha Noi, Vatican officials and foreign pressmen had opportunities to come to visit the Central Highlands. The rights of the people from all ethnicities in the Central highlands are guaranteed. Vietnam’s law ensures the right to freedom of religion and belief and non-religion and belief of all citizens, which is clearly enshrined in the Constitution and respected in reality. There is absolutely no question of the so-called “repression of Protestants”. On the contrary, Protestants in the Central Highland enjoy favorable conditions for religious practices.

Observation of the Special Rapporteur:The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply.

Correspondence from 2004

The record of correspondence for 2004 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1.

On 6 May 2003, the Special Rapporteur sent a communication to the Government of Viet Nam regarding the cases of three imprisoned members of the United Montagnard Christian Church, namely Y-Suon Mlo, from Buon Kuang village, Y-Het Nie Kdam from Buon Ea Tieo in Daklak province, and Y-Wan Ayun, from Buon Gram village in Daklak province, who were allegedly executed by lethal injection on 29 October 2002 by the Vietnamese (Cong An) security police for taking part in peaceful demonstrations in February 2001. The security police allegedly tried to force a prison nurse to administer the injections. As the nurse allegedly refused, the Cong An police allegedly pushed her aside, and injected the drug into the three Christians. Within minutes, they reportedly experienced convulsions and died.

On 5 August 2003, the Special Rapporteur, the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders sent a communication to the Government of Viet Nam regarding the case of Y-Su Nie, a Degar and member of the Montagnard Christian Church, from Buon Mbhao village, Mdrak district, Dak Lac, who had reportedly died on 31 January 2003, a few hours after having been released from custody. He had reportedly been held at Buonmathuot prison since 15 November 2002. His detention was allegedly related to his religion and to his activities as a land rights advocate. While in prison he was reportedly beaten and subjected to electric shocks. On 30 January 2003, he was allegedly handcuffed and injected with an unknown chemical substance, which it is feared was lethal. Prison authorities reportedly subsequently released him but warned him that he would die shortly. When he saw his family he allegedly told them that he was injected with poison while in detention. He reportedly died the next day. He was buried on 2 February 2003.

On 5 August 2003, the Government of Viet Nam transmitted its response to the communication sent by the Special Rapporteur on 6 May 2003, regarding the cases of the three Christians from the Montagnard Church, namely Y-Suon Mlo, Y-Het Nie Kdam and Y-Wan Ayun. The Government stated that the information transmitted in the letter was totally false and should be considered malicious slander made up by an irresponsible person. The Government reported that there had never been any arbitrary execution by lethal injection in Viet Nam and that such cases were no more than a myth. The Government affirmed that, after having carried out a thorough investigation by relevant government authorities in Viet Nam, Y-Suon Mlo and Y Wan Ayun could not be identified. The Government therefore concluded that such two cases did not exist. Regarding the case of Y-Het Nie Kdam, the Government was allegedly able to gather information showing that he was arrested after having committed acts in violation of the law and he would be tried before a court of law. Normal legal proceedings were allegedly undertaken.

On 20 November 2003, the Government of Viet Nam responded to a communication jointly sent by the Special Rapporteur, the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders. The Government reported that the allegations and information received by the Special Rapporteurs concerning Y-Sue Nie were completely false. It was affirmed that, by law in Viet Nam, no one can be arrested and detained for reasons based merely on religious grounds. Torture and any form of inhuman treatment and punishment are strictly forbidden. These are clearly stipulated in the Constitution as well as other relevant laws and are faithfully observed in practice. The Government finally recalled Article 71 of the 1992 Constitution of Viet Nam which states: “The citizen shall enjoy inviolability of the person and the protection of the law with regard to his life, health, honor and dignity... It is strictly forbidden to use any form as harassment and coercion, torture, violation of individual honor and dignity, against a citizen”. The Government reported that the Penal Code of Viet Nam has provisions for penalties against those who infringe upon the above-mentioned rights of any individual.

Correspondence from 1983-2002

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has been corresponding with Governments regarding alleged violations since the mandate was established over two decades ago. While the Project on Extrajudicial Executions is making efforts to provide easily browsed versions of as many years as possible, much of the earlier correspondence is available only in the PDF versions of reports from 1983 to the present.

Viet Nam: Visits & Communications

Correspondence from 2007