Six veterans in Lam Dong sentenced for third time in 11-year legal battle

LAM DONG, Vietnam – A local court on Jan. 30 sentenced six military veterans to prison for "forest destruction," upholding penalties in a controversial legal battle that has lasted 11 years.

The People’s Court of Area 6 sentenced Do Manh Hung to seven months in prison. Five other defendants—Ngan Xuan Dung, Vu Tat Dac, Hoang Van San, Nguyen Nam Thai, and Cao Minh Dien—each received six-month terms. The sentences match previous trial rulings that were later overturned by higher courts.

The defendants continue to maintain their innocence, asserting that the land they cleared in 2015 was no longer classified as forest at the time. They testified that they cleared the area to plant trees to raise money for a local veterans' association fund.

The 11-year proceedings have faced significant scrutiny. The High People's Court in Ho Chi Minh City previously ruled that the initial damage assessment violated legal procedures. Furthermore, a 2022 re-evaluation by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development was unable to determine the actual extent of the damage.

Despite the inconclusive 2022 assessment, the lower court maintained its guilty verdict. The defendants said they intend to appeal the decision.

A decade-long dispute over a mere 0.98 hectares of forest land has evolved into a stark indictment of systemic weaknesses within Vietnam’s judicial framework. At the heart of the controversy is a lower court’s apparent defiance of a High Court mandate and its dismissal of new forensic findings from a central ministry.

The High Court had previously vacated prior judgments in the case, identifying nine distinct procedural violations and specifically citing a lack of objectivity in the original forensic examination. Despite these directives, the trial court’s third iteration of the verdict remained virtually unchanged, relying on the same discredited evidence. This persistent recalcitrance raises fundamental questions regarding local judicial independence and the consistent application of the rule of law.

The case has taken on a significant institutional dimension with the intervention of the Vietnam Veterans Association. The association’s chairman—a retired Senior General and former Deputy Minister of Defense—issued a direct appeal to the Supreme People’s Procuracy, signaling an unusual level of high-level concern. This has created a rare public friction point: a powerful, state-affiliated organization openly challenging local judicial authorities to protect its members.

The lower court’s refusal to align with superior rulings, even under pressure from influential national bodies, suggests either a complex power struggle or a profound institutional failure to admit original error. Ultimately, this 11-year legal odyssey serves as a critical litmus test for the transparency, fairness, and accountability of Vietnam’s criminal justice process.

While this case has no direct economic impact on the Vietnamese diaspora, it carries significant socio-cultural weight, reinforcing the perception among many Vietnamese-Americans that Vietnam’s legal system remains opaque and overly complex. The story of veterans—a demographic traditionally honored by the state—being caught in a decade-long legal battle over a community-oriented project serves as a frequent case study in Little Saigon and online forums. For a community that closely monitors the rule of law in their homeland, this saga stands as a stark example of the systemic challenges still present in Vietnam.