This is also a rare occurrence in criminal trials up to now.
Truong My Lan said that among the sealed and temporarily seized assets, there were two Hermes bags made from albino crocodile skin. Those two bags were souvenirs so she hoped the Trial Council would return them to the defendant's family.
In addition, there was a set of diamond jewelry given by the defendant's mother as a souvenir and as a lucky charm. The jewelry set included a pair of 6-carat earrings, a pendant of more than 10 carats, and a diamond ring of more than 10 carats, totaling more than 30 carats.
Ms. Truong My Lan has the right to make her request, and whether to return it or not depends on other grounds, protecting the defendant's rights, but it must also be legal, ensuring compliance with the provisions of the law.
One of the necessary guarantees is enforcement.
In a major case, the defendant Truong My Lan and her accomplices were prosecuted for appropriating a total amount of hundreds of thousands of billions of VND through embezzlement and bond issuance; illegally transporting more than 4 billion USD. Therefore, the execution of the judgment and recovery of assets must be carried out to minimize damage.
For assets of low value, identified as personal, family, or clan souvenirs, the Trial Panel may consider returning them to the family.
However, for assets of great value, they must be temporarily detained to deal with the consequences.
According to information from the luxury bag market, many years ago, the price of the Hermes Himalayan Crocodile Birkin bag ranged from about 53,000 USD to more than 200,000 USD from different versions.
Diamond jewelry sets are also of great value.
So, the return as requested by Truong My Lan is not easily accepted.
If defendants in criminal cases involving corruption, embezzlement, and bribery all request to return their assets because they are souvenirs, then what is law enforcement?
Preventing and combating crimes related to corruption and embezzlement without confiscation of assets is not successful.
