Vietnam jails ex-minister for taking bribes in solar energy pricing scandal
The South-east Asian country has committed to reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and is trying to increase wind and solar production to meet soaring demand.
Hoang Quoc Vuong, 62, admitted taking a US$57,600 (RM249,000) bribe to favour solar power plants in southern Ninh Thuan province with special pricing when they sold power to the national electricity company.
Vuong was deputy minister of trade and industry between 2015 and 2020 and chaired state-owned Electricity of Vietnam (EVN) between 2012 and 2015.
According to the verdict, EVN spent almost US$154 million to buy solar power from three solar power plants in Ninh Thuan province between 2018 and 2020, causing a loss of more than US$40 million to the state budget.
Vuong admitted to the court that he received a bribe but his family had paid the amount back.
'I think during my public work performance, I had done things wrong, causing losses. So I take responsibility in paying the amount back to the state,' Vuong told the court.
Vuong said in his final words before the court that his 'wrongdoings were painful lessons, erasing my contributions (to the state) in various positions'.
Eleven other energy and tax officials involved in the case were also put on trial. They were given punishments that ranged from suspended sentences of three years to six years in jail for abuse of power and lack of responsibilities.
The court in Hanoi also ordered three power plants that benefited from the power sales to EVN to pay the US$40 million of losses back to the state-owned group. — AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Free Malaysia Today
3 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
South Africa eyes new markets after US tariffs
South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa emphasised that safeguarding export industries is the government's primary concern. (AP pic) JOHANNESBURG : South Africa is seeking new markets in Africa and Asia as it negotiates with the United States over looming 30% trade tariffs, which could cost around 30,000 jobs, officials said Monday. Government ministers expressed frustration with the US over the tariff – among those due to take effect against several countries later this week – saying South African exports do not compete with US industry and were only a fraction of that country's total imports. The 30% tariff is the highest in sub-Saharan Africa and comes as diplomatic relations between South Africa and the US are in tatters over a range of domestic and international policies. 'Our foremost priority is protecting our export industries,' president Cyril Ramaphosa said in his weekly newsletter. 'We will continue to engage the US in an attempt to preserve market access for our products. We must also accelerate the diversification of our export markets, particularly by deepening intra-African trade,' he said. The US is South Africa's second-largest trading partner by country after China. The tariffs will in particular hit South Africa's agriculture, automotive and textiles sectors, officials said, although 35% of exports are exempted, including copper, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, lumber articles and certain critical minerals. The impact on growth depends on various factors, including the sourcing of alternative markets, foreign minister Ronald Lamola said in a statement. He cited forecasts that the impact may shave 0.2% off growth, which was only around 0.1% in the first quarter of this year. The South African Reserve Bank last week warned that the US levy could cost 100,000 jobs, with unemployment already at more than 30%. But trade department director general Simphiwe Hamilton told reporters Monday their estimate was that approximately 30,000 jobs could be affected. South Africa 'no threat' In a bid to avert the high tariff, South Africa has offered to import US liquefied natural gas and some US agricultural products, as well as invest in its mining and metals-recycling industries. Pretoria is focused on negotiations for a new deal despite the 'very extreme provocation' on the part of the US, Lamola told reporters. The 30% tariff was 'inscrutable' considering that imports from South Africa only represented 0.25% of total US imports, the minister said. 'Moreover, South Africa poses no trade threat to the US economy or its national security,' he said, arguing the imports supported US industry and did not compete with it. An example was that South African agriculture exports were 'counter-seasonal' and so filled gaps in the US market without replacing domestic produce, he said. Pretoria's plummeting ties with Washington and failure to reach a new trade deal have been heavily criticised at home, including by some of the parties in the coalition government who have accused Ramaphosa and his team of diplomatic missteps. On top of disagreements over a range of issues, including South Africa's case accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza at the International Court of Justice, Washington in March expelled Pretoria's ambassador after he criticised Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement. In his newsletter, Ramaphosa said the government has established a support desk that will help exporters and producers explore alternative markets in the rest of Africa, Asia and the Middle East. It will also push forward with plans for a free-trade area for the African continent, he said. The US announced last week 15% tariffs on exports from several sub-Saharan countries, including the export-reliant small mountain kingdom of Lesotho, which had initially been threatened with 50% tariffs.
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
NST Leader: Subscription squeeze
There was a time when entering into a contract was as simple as ABC. The company handed you a contract and you sign off if the terms were acceptable. When you wanted to end the service, you pay the current bill and that was it. But with competition getting intense, businesses have become creative by inventing the subscription contract that comes with a self-renewal clause, unless terminated with notice. And the auto-renewal clause comes with a termination penalty. As high as RM58,000 for quitting a wellness programme, as one complainant told the National Consumer Complaints Centre (NCCC). Herein lies a trap. When you try to unsubscribe from the service, it is like searching for a needle in a haystack. If you managed to do so, you end up paying a hefty penalty. Is this legal? Here, we come face to face with the "on the one hand and on the other hand" argument of lawyers. As a general legal principle, a contract is an agreement between parties. Were the terms made explicit to the consumer? If so, then the consumer's case ends there, except if the penalty is excessive, like the RM58,000 imposed by the wellness company. In such cases, it is best to proceed to the Tribunal for Consumer Claims. Vigilance is the key. But being vigilant isn't easy in a business environment where companies push the concept of consent to the edge of the law. Complaints to the NCCC tell us that the subscription contracts need regulatory intervention. Not that Malaysia doesn't have laws. It has several, but unlike the United Kingdom, not specific to subscription contracts. Do we need one? Certainly, but first, let's look at what we already have. The Contracts Act 1950 (CA) is one of several. Subscription agreements are contracts, they clearly fall under it. The CA makes consent of the parties a critical element. Another, and perhaps more relevant, is the Consumer Protection Act (1999), which specifically addresses unfair contract terms. Astronomical penalties, either made known or hidden, are likely to be treated as such. So will deceptive auto-renewals. Finally, the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA). Interestingly, the CMA imposes a duty to act reasonably on all service providers. If the auto-renewals and penalties are not made known to and agreed by the consumer, then the service providers could be found to have failed in their duty to act reasonably. A point needs to be made, though. Despite scores of complaints to the NCCC, there has been no litigation on such issues. Neither have the regulators acted on the complaints, Perhaps, they are waiting for the consumers to lodge a report with them. A report from the consumer shouldn't be the only way for regulators and enforcement agencies to act. Even the police are using viral videos to launch their investigations. The regulators must go where the complaints are: consumer associations, NCCC and media reports. Malaysia needs a specific law such as the UK's Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. Proper consent of the consumer, together with a cooling-off period of 14 days, is a pillar of these regulations.
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
NST Leader: Subscription squeeze - Regulating the auto-renewal trap
THERE was a time when entering into a contract was as simple as ABC. The company handed you a contract and you sign off if the terms were acceptable. When you wanted to end the service, you pay the current bill and that was it. But with competition getting intense, businesses have become creative by inventing the subscription contract that comes with a self-renewal clause, unless terminated with notice. And the auto-renewal clause comes with a termination penalty. As high as RM58,000 for quitting a wellness programme, as one complainant told the National Consumer Complaints Centre (NCCC). Herein lies a trap. When you try to unsubscribe from the service, it is like searching for a needle in a haystack. If you managed to do so, you end up paying a hefty penalty. Is this legal? Here, we come face to face with the "on the one hand and on the other hand" argument of lawyers. As a general legal principle, a contract is an agreement between parties. Were the terms made explicit to the consumer? If so, then the consumer's case ends there, except if the penalty is excessive, like the RM58,000 imposed by the wellness company. In such cases, it is best to proceed to the Tribunal for Consumer Claims. Vigilance is the key. But being vigilant isn't easy in a business environment where companies push the concept of consent to the edge of the law. Complaints to the NCCC tell us that the subscription contracts need regulatory intervention. Not that Malaysia doesn't have laws. It has several, but unlike the United Kingdom, not specific to subscription contracts. Do we need one? Certainly, but first, let's look at what we already have. The Contracts Act 1950 (CA) is one of several. Subscription agreements are contracts, they clearly fall under it. The CA makes consent of the parties a critical element. Another, and perhaps more relevant, is the Consumer Protection Act (1999), which specifically addresses unfair contract terms. Astronomical penalties, either made known or hidden, are likely to be treated as such. So will deceptive auto-renewals. Finally, the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA). Interestingly, the CMA imposes a duty to act reasonably on all service providers. If the auto-renewals and penalties are not made known to and agreed by the consumer, then the service providers could be found to have failed in their duty to act reasonably. A point needs to be made, though. Despite scores of complaints to the NCCC, there has been no litigation on such issues. Neither have the regulators acted on the complaints, Perhaps, they are waiting for the consumers to lodge a report with them. A report from the consumer shouldn't be the only way for regulators and enforcement agencies to act. Even the police are using viral videos to launch their investigations. The regulators must go where the complaints are: consumer associations, NCCC and media reports. Malaysia needs a specific law such as the UK's Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. Proper consent of the consumer, together with a cooling-off period of 14 days, is a pillar of these regulations.
