The Government Inspectorate is examining documents submitted by Tra Vinh inspectors on a road allegedly bent to allow local officials in the southern province collect compensation.
Tran Van Ba, chief of the Tra Vinh Inspectorate, told local media last Sunday that his agency submitted documents on the case to the Government Inspectorate’s anti-corruption department more than a month ago after the latter requisitioned them.
Tra Vinh People’s Committee approved the 2.2km long, 19m wide Road 1 project in August 2006 to be built at a cost of VND141 billion ($6.03 million). The provincial Department of Transport was to be the investor and the project would collect 28.3 hectares of land from 253 households and three organizations.
However, according to the documents, the project was changed by making the road take a turn and have its length extended by 800 meters and width by seven meters. This increased the project cost by VND14.8 billion ($633,000) to nearly $160 billion.
The adjustment had the road run through 41,000 square meters of land belonging to 20 provincial officials, giving them a windfall in compensation. Of these, eight were officials of the transport department who owned 17,000 square meters of land, including the then director Phan Thanh Son whose land had an area of 6,200 square meters.
In another conflict of interest, two construction contractors also owned 40,000 square meters of land in the project site.
In 2009, the provincial inspectors also determined that there were signs of collusion and settlement among staff handling the bidding process, the investor and the contractors for personal gain and other instances of intentional wrongdoing causing serious consequences.
The Tra Vinh inspectors held that those mainly responsible for the violations were Phan Thanh Son, then director of the transport department who is now retired, and Nguyen Trung Hoang, director of traffic project management board, now Vice Chairman of the province.
The road was completed in 2018, but complications in the construction contracts have hindered project final payments. Furthermore, households who have had their land claimed by the project have not been given areas for resettlement, triggering many petitions to authorities.