On the morning of November 12, the National Assembly discussed in the hall the draft Law on the Enforcement of Criminal Judgments (amended); the draft Law on the Enforcement of Temporary Detention, Temporary Imprisonment and Prohibition from Leaving the Place of Residence.
Regarding the revised Law on Enforcement of Criminal Judgments, delegate To Van Tam (Quang Ngai Delegation) was concerned about not stipulating "resolve the consequences" as a detail when considering the classification of prisoners.
The current law (Article5) stipulates that the results of overcoming the consequences of criminal acts are the criteria for considering reducing/ranking off prison serving, but the draft removes this regulation.
Delegate To Van Tam expressed his agreement with the decision not to stipulate that remediation of consequences is a detail to consider classifying prisoners. Because remediation of consequences was considered a mitigating circumstance when sentencing (when sentencing). If it is continued to be included in the scoring review (prison classification), this detail can be considered twice.
Incorporating this criterion can create an unfair psychology among prisoners. Those with conditions can recover early to have their sentences reduced or be considered for better classification.
Therefore, the delegate believes that the decision not to stipulate this detail is appropriate.
Meanwhile, delegate Nguyen Thanh Sang - Deputy Head of the Ho Chi Minh City Party Committee's Internal Affairs Committee (Ho Chi Minh City Delegation) - said that the current regulations should be retained.
Because first, the remediation of consequences is assessed to be aware of serving the sentence caused by their criminal acts; second, ensure the rights of victims in being compensated; third, encourage prisoners to overcome the consequences.
Overcoming the consequences is a mitigating circumstance for criminal liability in the investigation, prosecution, and trial stages, and in the execution stages of the judgment is even more important.
In criminal cases of fraud and property appropriation, there are hundreds, even thousands of victims. If there is no regulation on remediation of consequences as a detail to consider classifying the prison sentence as unfair and the rights of victims will not be guaranteed.
Therefore, it is recommended to implement the current regulations, which is to remedy the consequences of their criminal acts, which is recognized as a criterion for classifying the prison sentence as a crime.
The delegate said that during the investigation, prosecution and trial stages, the Trial Council, when deciding the verdict, considered remedying the consequences if the defendant and defendant remedyed them during that stage of the proceedings. Here are prisoners who have overcome the consequences during the execution of their sentences.
He gave an example in a fraud case, appropriating 10 billion VND in assets, the defendant and defendant at that time recovered 7 billion VND. The trial panel only relied on a fine of over VND 7 billion to remedy that situation. With the remaining 3 billion VND, during the execution period, the prisoners will recover and consider reducing their sentences.
The delegate said that in the criteria for considering sentencing, remedying the consequences is just one of many criteria (study, good reform...). Therefore, if anyone meets one of those criteria, their sentence should be considered for reduction.
"The most important thing to remedy the consequences is to return money and assets to the victims," the delegate said, citing the case of Alibaba Group and the Truong My Lan case. If strict only the regulation on remedying the consequences during the investigation and trial period is applied, the consequences will be less remedied and the assets will be returned to the victims.
