Controversy over voluntary extra classes
On September 11, the Hanoi People's Court continued the appellate trial of the case of abusing positions and powers while performing official duties related to Ms. Nguyen Thi Binh - former Principal of Ba Dinh Secondary School and former accountant Pham Thi Minh Nguyet.
At yesterday's trial, the prosecutor affirmed that the activity of collecting tutoring fees of the former principal of Ba Dinh Secondary School "shows signs" of crime and pointed out 7 points that have not been clarified and need to be overturned for re-investigation.
Among these are contents related to extra classes agreements between parents and schools. According to the prosecutor's argument, Circular 17 of the Ministry of Education and Training stipulates that students who want extra classes must have a petition and parents must directly sign a commitment with the school. However, the investigating agency only seized minutes of agreement as photocopies without confirmation from the homeroom teacher or school board (with explanations due to typing errors). While the case file has not seized these extra class application forms and has not taken statements from students as well as parents to prove the voluntary agreement.
Lawyer Tran Hong Phuc said that in fact, in this case, the investigating agency sought victims to serve as a basis for accusing the defendants, but no one came to report.
When someone comes to report, it is mainly those who apply for Ms. Binh and Ms. Nguyet" - Lawyer Phuc stated.
According to the lawyer, at the trial, there were parents present, they also affirmed that there was a petition for agreement, even the collection level of 15,000 VND/session was proposed by parents themselves to the school, not based on Circular 17 or Decision 22.
This is the basis for recognizing the previous investigation results regarding the failure to find the victim" - Lawyer Phuc assessed.
From the above analysis, the lawyer affirmed the view "there is no possibility of re-investigating to find all voluntary supplementary learning applications of students in all 24 grades 7, 8, 9 of the 2013-2014 school year" - according to the proposal of the representative of the procuracy.
In addition, lawyer Phuc said that the student's testimony also needs to be considered because students who have participated in extra classes have no reason to admit that they have violated the law.
It is not yet known who those students are now, how they are working and whether this declaration will affect their work and career or not. The return of the case file for investigation is to prove constitutionality, legality and objective truth, not to create social consequences, affecting the fate of hundreds and thousands of people. Therefore, in our opinion, the return of the file to search for and identify the list of students is not grounded for acceptance" - the lawyer analyzed.
Regarding the amount allocated for management work, the procuracy calculated that from December 2013 to May 2014, this figure was more than 642 million VND (accounting for 30% of the figure of 2.1 billion VND).
In which, the amount spent on management work is 349 million VND, equivalent to 54.3%. Ms. Binh received 132 million VND, equivalent to 37% of management expenditure. Some vice principals, accountants, and treasurers also received money, while 24 homeroom teachers received a total of 26.4 million VND.
From these figures, the procuracy believes that there are signs of personal gain and further investigation is needed.
However, lawyer Phuc said that the expenditures were made according to internal spending regulations and local guiding documents.
The lawyer cited an appendix in the inspection conclusion and some documents in the file, stating that there are documents determining that the amount spent on management work has not exceeded 15% according to the allocation mechanism.
The personal benefits achieved are due to their efforts and labor in the process of implementing tutoring and extra classes and are paid that amount according to the State's regulations, according to the collective's regulations. So why is it called personal gain? What is the issue of personal gain?" - the lawyer stated his point of view.
Parents affirm no damage, petition the court to declare former principal innocent
On the parent's side, Mr. Nguyen Dinh Lam, former head of the Parents' Committee of Ba Dinh Secondary School in the 2013-2014 school year, who was summoned to attend the appellate trial, affirmed: "We are not harmed at all, no damage".
Mr. Lam said that students participating in extra classes at the time of the incident benefited from many benefits, including teacher education with very cheap tuition fees, only 15,000 VND/session/student. This tuition fee level, according to Mr. Lam, is not only in the 2013-2014 school year but from previous years.
