IN THE
LAST 3 MONTHS
[UU[
The last months of 2003 saw several events that dealt painful blows to
the Vietnam Communist regime.
On
November 19, the American House of Representatives passed Resolution 427,
criticizing Hanoi for oppressive actions against the non-state-controlled
United Buddhist Church of Vietnam and cracks down on the most venerable monks
of the church, the self -immolation of a Vietnamese monk in North Carolina to
protest Hanoi's violations on human rights and religious freedom.
The
U.S. House of Representatives' resolution was followed by a similar resolution
of the European Parliament. The 626 parliament members, requesting close watch
on Hanoi's implementation of its pledge to respect international conventions
regarding human rights and freedom, unanimously passed the resolution. It
emphasizes on agreements and promises made by Hanoi in various talks with
European Union concerning human rights.
The
resolutions were direct reactions against recent Hanoi brazen suppressive
measures to silence dissenting voices of many democracy activists and religious
leaders.
*
In
the last months of 2003, the Communist regime in Vietnam has held several court
sessions to crack down on the dissidents whose non-violent struggle for a true
democracy and for religious freedom has met merciless suppression.
The
most reputed case was of the young doctor Pham Hong Son. Last year, he was
charged with espionage against the Communist regime when he translated the
article "What is Democracy" posted by the Americans on the official
web site of the U.S. Embassy in Hanoi and handed out its copies to friends of
his. Along with some email messages exchanged with overseas Vietnamese
concerning non-classified information, the translation was claimed by Communist
authorities as an evidence to charge Pham Hong Son of disclosing "state
secrets” to those whose activities are aiming at overthrowing the Communist
regime.
In
June 2003, Pham Hong Son was sentenced to 13 years in prison plus 3 years under
house arrest.
The
prison term given to the "internet dissident" – a word newly coined
by Western press corps - prompted protests from some governments and human
rights organizations all around the world. Son's actions “do not fall into any
clause in the Vietnam Communist Criminal Law sanctioning the crime of
espionage,” they said.
On
August 26, 2003, the Court of Appeal in Hanoi reduced Pham Hong Son's sentence
to 5 years in prison, plus 3 years of house arrest.
At
about the same time, Hanoi authorities announced that a court in Ha Nam
province (North V.N. where Rev. Ly is serving his term in a prison) had reduced
Rev. Nguyen Van Ly’s sentence. The provincial court had reduced his prison term
to 10 years instead of 15 years as previously convicted by the Communist court
in Hue (Central Viet Nam) 2 years ago. Father Ly has been a perseverant
activist for religious freedom since 1994.
Some
in the world outside might appreciate the two reduced sentences as signs of
Hanoi's good will to positively respond to the public opinion outside Vietnam.
But many Vietnamese are taking the sentence reductions of Pham Hong Son and
Father Ly not as signs of tolerance but only a formal gesture to calm down the
anger of human rights activists and religious freedom supporters.
Others
even said the Communist authorities did anticipate possible reactions from the
world general public. So in the primary trials they gave the defendants rather
severe sentences in order to reduce them to shorter prison terms in the court
of appeal to show the world a brighter image of their regime.
On
September 10, 2003, the Communist court in Saigon convicted three relatives of
Rev. Nguyen Van Ly of "Abusing
liberty and democracy to act against the national great unity." His niece
and two nephews, daughter and sons of Father Ly's younger sister, were involved
in contacting overseas Vietnamese and providing them with news relating to
their uncle, who had been sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment and recently
reduced to 10 years. Earlier in the year, they had been charged of espionage.
After harsh criticism by international human rights activists, the Communist
authorities shifted the charge to “abusing democracy and freedom...”
In
all of the court sessions trying Rev. Ly, Doctor Son and Rev. Ly's niece and
nephews, the public and the press corps were not allowed in the court rooms
although Communist authorities had promised to hold open trials. Moreover, the
sessions lasted in a rather short time: about three hours.
In
the trial of the three Rev. Ly's relatives, the Communist court of appeal in
Saigon acted with the manners somehow surreptitious and inappropriate to the
dignity of a court of justice.
This
time the court permitted attendance of a limited number of the defendants'
relatives and lawyers. It informed them that the trial would take place in
courtroom number one of the Saigon Hall of Justice (near the former SVN
presidential palace). At 7:30 AM as notified by the court, the relatives and
lawyers were present at the said courtroom, but they found nobody there. They
asked the guards but nobody could tell them anything helpful.
After
about one hour of looking around, they finally found that the court session was
taking place at courtroom number eight. It took them fifteen minutes to argue
with the court police before they were allowed to attend. The lawyer was unable
to defend his clients because he had lost the first and crucial part of the
trial.
The
trial of the three relatives of Father Nguyen Van Ly was especially
unprecedented in another aspect. The procurator proposed that the three
defendants be sentenced terms of prison of 36 months (Nguyen Thi Hoa, the
sister); 20 to 30 months (Nguyen Truc Cuong, brother); 3 to 4 years (Nguyen Vu
Viet, brother).
The
presiding judge finally announced the sentences of longer terms: Hoa, 3 years, Cuong, 4 years and Viet, 5
years. The sentence longer than prosecutor's proposal is unprecedented in the
history of Vietnam.
This
should be referred to as nothing but a public contempt in broad explanation of
the judicial common sense of the civilized world.
The
case of the three Father Ly’s relatives concluded the same way as that of Dr.
Cuong and Father Ly. About two months
after their trials, all the three relatives of Reverence Ly were given reduced
sentences on November 28, 2003. Hoa's sentence was reduced to 4 months and 8
days. Cuong's and Viet's were both reduced to 2 years and 8 months. The case once more affirmed the
above-mentioned allegation: Hanoi sent dissidents to trial and gave them severe
sentences in order to reduce them later to calm down harsh criticism.
As
Hanoi leaders are doing their best to appear more lenient to the dissent
opinions, they keep dealing with some dissidents with iron hand. Probably they
have to calm down their faithful party ranking conservatives who always cling
to the principle of “the Party’s absolute leadership” for the safety, the
ruling positions of their party and power and lucrative jobs of themselves.
Last
year, the Ven. Thich Tri Luc, a Buddhist monk and activist of the non-state-run
United Buddhist Church, was granted asylum in Cambodia by the High Commissioner
for Refugees. Three months ago, he disappeared from his residence in Phnom
Penh, leaving no trace. Buddhist activists in and out of Vietnam said that he
was abducted by Hanoi Public Security and brought back to Vietnam. But Hanoi
government has categorically denied the allegation.
Not
until last month did Hanoi affirm that Ven. Thich Tri Luc was arrested at an
area close to the common border with Cambodia and confirm that he would be sent
to a court for trial. It was one in many thousand times that the Communist
authorities denied an action that they had committed surreptitiously and
admitted it when there was no way to conceal.
Almost
at the same time, when the two old monks, top leaders of the
non-state-controlled Unified Buddhist Church met with each other and a number
of other monks for a trip from Binh Dinh province to Saigon, Communist
authorities were trying to stop them. They sent their undercover agents to
force the monks back, acting as if they had been the monks' relatives or
followers by persuading the monks not to continue the trip.
But
they failed the attempt when a thousand local Buddhists gathered to protect the
monks, who then continued their journey. However, when the monks arrived in Nha
Trang, local Public Security arrested them, accusing them of "traffic
code" violations and sending them back to their residences.
As
usual, the Communist authorities claimed that the monks were traveling with
“state secret documents,” but refused to define the charge or to prove the
existence of such classified documents. The incident was followed by the new
administrative orders to put the three monks under house arrest again.
Presently,
Hanoi leaders seem to be alarmed by the fact that more and party members at
medium and high ranking levels are joining the dissenting side.
A
new victim of the crackdown campaign, a former bodyguard of Ho Chi Minh was
sentenced to 10 months in jail on November 12, 2003 after his call for the
release of all detained dissidents. Tran Dung Tien, 78, has been sentenced for
"abusing rights on democratic freedom." But all of what he did was
distributing an open letter to Communist leaders urging them to release all
democracy activists.
The
crackdowns are clearly an insult to the international human rights associations
and the free countries that have intervened in the human rights violations in
Vietnam. In late October, the United
States was sending a high ranking official, Mr. John Hanford to Vietnam for
human rights fact finding. The U.S official was permitted to visit some
dissidents (Buddhist, Catholic...) and locations such as Ban Me Thuot.
In
his report after the trip, he expressed great concerns about Hanoi leaders'
lack of understanding of religious issues. Hanoi behavior towards religious
freedom could be a serious mistake in dealing with America especially in the
critical period when Hanoi is in desperate need of better relations with the
U.S.
The
different visits by many foreign officials resulted in a human rights report
made by the U.S. State Department. The report strongly criticizes the Vietnam
Communist regime of unrelenting violations on human rights and religious
freedom.
In
the last weeks of 2003, Hanoi had its different satellite organizations hold
dozen of meetings in order to raise protest against the U.S. State Department
report and particularly the two resolutions by the U.S. House of
Representatives and the European Parliament. The protests, as usual, are aimed
mainly at the Party conservative veterans who are living with their past and in
discontentment with the current reforms, not at those international critics.
On
December 30, 2003, a former journalist serving the "Communism
Magazine" for 10 years until a few years ago, was sentenced to 7 years in
jail plus 3 years under house arrest. Nguyen Vu Binh, 35, was charged with espionage, a vague term
often used by Hanoi to convict any dissident it put on trial. He was arraigned
for gathering anti-government information for anti-Hanoi organizations in
exile. In fact, he used the Internet to circulate his article criticizing the
Communist leaders on the border agreement between Hanoi and Beijing. Many Vietnamese accused Hanoi leaders for
the agreement they said selling national territory cheaply only in the
interests of the Communist Party.
At
about the same time, he sent a letter to the United States House of
Representatives, complaining of violations of
human rights and democracy in Vietnam. He also released an open letter
to the Communist leaders urging them on political reform to build a true
democracy in Vietnam. Nguyen Vu Binh was arrested in September, 2002.
On
December 31, 2003, he was tried at Hanoi People's Court in a closed session
that lasted only 90 minutes with no concrete
evidence more than the said letters to support the charges.
Right
after the sentence was announced, the US State Department and its embassy in
Hanoi, along with many international organizations for human rights and freedom
severely criticized the Communist government for the action against the
peaceful opinion expression of Nguyen Vu Binh.. According to many Vietnamese,
Hanoi's action shows defiance of the
international good will, in particular the United States, while Hanoi is
looking for great help to be admitted in WTO and for better diplomatic relations
.
On
December 24, 2003, the Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Chan Hy, 74, burned
himself to death at Lien Hoa Pagoda, Charlotte-Mecklenburg in North Carolina.
He left a letter saying that his self-immolation was for the three wishes for
Vietnam: Freedom of religion and belief, human rights and democracy,
sovereignty of lands and sea borders.
The
monk's protest by giving up his life shocks every Vietnamese who has heard the
event.
***
=====================