Law & Linguistics

Contrary to Vietnamese law, the upcoming trial of eight Vietnamese Catholics are closed to the public. According to Vietnamese law, trials are open to all those who are over the age of sixteen except in cases, such as rape, where an open trial would harm the reputation of the victim.¹ The trial in this case stems from the dispute between Thai Ha parish in Ha Noi, Viet Nam and the communist government over the taking of the parish’s land. Thus, the victim whose reputation would be harm in this case is the government itself. 

The Thai Ha parish is operated by the Redemptorists, who arrived in Vietnam in 1925.² In 1928, they bought 60,000 square meters (approximately 14.826 acres), where they built a church, a convent, and a seminary. When the atheist Communist party came in power in the 1940s and 1950s, most parishioners and religious were prosecuted, imprisoned, or fled to South Vietnam. The parish was left vulnerable to the control of the Communist party, who converted the convent into a hospital and gave of the land to state companies and members of the party.³

The parish’s land has been reduced to 2,700 square meters (approximately 0.667 acres), an area that is no longer sufficient to serve the revival and expansion of the parish’s population. Currently, the parish holds seven weekend masses (five on Sunday and two on Saturday). Further, it is considering adding an 8:00 pm mass on Sunday. Therefore, since 1996, to serve its growing population, parish officials have been petitioning to the government to return the land. The faithful have gathered for demonstrations, especially on holy days.  At first, the government ignored the petitions and demonstrations. Later, it responded that it had bought the land in 1961 from Father Joseph Vu Ngoc Bich, who remained at the church during the war. The parish officials argued that Father Vu did not have authority to transfer the parish’s land and demanded to see evidence of such a transfer. However, the government refused to show any evidence claiming that such documents were “classified information.”⁴

The event that led up to the arrest of the eight parishioners occurred on August 15, 2008, on the feast of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. Hundreds of people, parishioners and pilgrims, gathered at the church to celebrate the feast. In an attempt to reach the altar where a statue of the Virgin Mary and a cross stood to pray, the parishioners joined hands and knocked down a portion of a shabby wall. The wall was built in haste to serve as a fence between the church’s remaining property and the property that was taken. The wall had already been worn over the years and was partially damaged due to a recent storm. It took less than five minutes for the wall to fall, allowing the parishioners to enter and pray by the altar.⁵

The eight defendants were among those who knocked down the wall. They were charged with “damaging state property and causing social disturbance.” Neither of these charges is well founded. First, the defendants were not causing any social disturbance. The fall of the wall took less than five minutes, and the defendants along with hundreds of other companions were praying and singing before, during, and after the fall.  Second, if the land in fact belonged to the parish, property was not state property, and the defendants did not damage state property. Even if it were state property, a fine rather than an arrest would have been sufficient. The damage was estimated to be a measly 3.7 million dong ($218 USD). In October, the government destroyed the wall and built a flower garden in its place.⁶

The defendants will be tried on December 5, 2008. Many, including the attorney’s lawyer, Mr. Le Tran Luat, suspect that the trial is only for show and that the defendants’ sentences are already decided.⁷ Though this may sound like a conspiracy theory, it is not unfounded. First, the trial will not be held publicly. According to Mr. Le Tran Luat, the defedants’ attorney, the court ordered that anyone, other than the defendants and their lawyer, who wished to attend the trial, must submit an application form.⁸ Second, the trial will not be held at the Ha Noi Courthouse. Instead, it will be held on the fourth floor of the People’s Committee Building. Third, the trial date, December 5, coincides with the consecration of the new auxiliary bishop of Ha Noi, Mgr. Laurence Chu Van Minh, an event was scheduled long before the trial date was set.⁹ Attempts to reschedule the trial date have been unsuccessful. Regardless of the motive behind the scheduling of the trial date, the effect is that many people, religious and laymen, will be occupied with the consecration and will be unable to attend the trial or engage in any sort of demonstration or protest outside the committee building. 

This case has been an uphill battle from the start. Mr. Le was not allowed to meet with two of the eight defendants, who are currently held at the Hoa Lo Prison, the same “Hanoi Hilton” where John McCain and other prisoners of war were held during the Vietnam War¹⁰ The government required proof of representation before allowing an attorney to meet with his clients. When Mr. Le presented his proof of representation to the prison guards, Mr. Le was still unable to meet with his clients because the guards forced the prisoners, one way or another, to refuse meeting with their lawyers.¹¹ Though the chance of acquittal before the tribunal is close to zero, Mr. Le hoped that he will succeed to prove his clients’ innocence before the eyes of the people.

Facing injustice is certainly not anything new with Catholics. This is not the first, nor will it be the last. Let us pray that God will continue to grant Catholics the strength necessary to champion for justice, truth, and Christ.

1. http://www.rfa.org/vietnamese/in_depth/justice-and-truth-for-thai-ha-11252008172040.html?searchterm=None [↩]
2. http://groups.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/browse_thread/thread/544534f82dd50d5e?pli=1 [↩]
3. http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=11463 [↩]
4. http://www.rfa.org/vietnamese/in_depth/interview-with-Reverend-Gioan-NguyenNgocNamPhong-in-Hanoi-NTran-08192008155709.html?searchterm=None [↩]
5. http://www.vietcatholic.net/News/Clients/ReadArticle.aspx?Id=61478 [↩]
6. http://www.theindiancatholic.com/report.asp?nid=11833 [↩]
7. http://www.theindiancatholic.com/report.asp?nid=11833 [↩]
8. http://www.vietcatholic.net/News/Clients/ReadArticle.aspx?Id=61410, http://www.rfa.org/vietnamese/in_depth/justice-and-truth-for-thai-ha-11252008172040.html?searchterm=None [↩]
9. http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=13874&size=A [↩]
10. http://www.bbc.co.uk/vietnamese/vietnam/story/2008/11/081124_hanoicatholictrial.shtml [↩]
11. Id. See also http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=16862&t=Vietnam:+Catholics+on+trial+denied+lawyer+access [↩]

Law Assumption, Catholic, Christ, church, court, dispute, disturbance, Hanoi, Hanoi Hilton, justice, land, lawyer, Mary, mass, parish, property, Redemptorist, social, state, Thai Ha, trial, Vietnam, Vietnamese