VIETNAM, NEWS ANALYSIS, JUNE 10, 2000.

 =======

THE CASE OF HA SI PHU AND HUMAN RIGHTS

=======

Since the last few weeks, more and more voices have been raised to demand that the Vietnam Communist Party's government cease threatening the renowned dissident Ha Si Phu with prosecution on charges of treason that might result in a capital sentence.

Ha Si Phu, real name Nguyen Xuan Tu, is an intellect who was trained in North Vietnam as a biologist, and was a former vice-director of the Communist Institute of Science in Dalat. He later turned his back at the Communist Party and wrote several articles expressing his views on Communism, the plight of the Vietnamese people under the Communist regime, criticizing the Party's incapability in ruling the country. His critiques of the Communist system published in 1993 drew international attention but provoke the party leaders' anger.

In December 1995, he was arrested and charged with "revealing state secrets." The "secrets" was merely a letter to the Politburo from former prime minister Vo Van Kiet, calling for political and economic reforms. The letter had been widely circulated among the ranking party members. Not until 1996 was he released from prison.

Incarcerated along with him were Bui Minh Quoc, a poet and Tieu Dao Bao Cu, a writer. All of them are living in Dalat and have been put under unofficial house arrest ever since. His home has been placed under permanent surveillance.

On May 19, 2000, the Vietnamese émigrés' media received an open letter by five dissidents in Vietnam sent to the Communist national assembly to demand that Ha Si Phu be given full freedom and that the Communist government stop harassing and threatening him. The letter was signed by Hoang Minh Chinh, Pham Que Duong, Nguyen Thanh Giang, Hoang Tien and Tran Dung Tien, prominent activists who have long been major figures in the scientific, politic and ideological activities in Hanoi.

According to their letter, Hanoi Public Security officers searched Ha Si Phu's home on April 28, 2000, but found nothing that could prove his violation of any criminal law. The security cops then confiscated his legally possessed computer, his personal papers and computer diskettes he was working with.

On May 12, the Public Security chief of Lam Dong province signed two decisions. One orders the official house arrest of Mr. Ha Si Phu and requires his daily report to the Dalat Public Security headquarters. The second order calls for him to be tried for treason against the "socialist state of Vietnam" under Article 72 of the Communist Criminal Code.

On May 31, Human Rights Watch in New York called for the immediate release of Ha Si Phu.

"Unless there is clear evidence that Mr. Ha committed criminal acts, he

should be immediately released," said Mike Jendrzejczyk, Washington

Director of the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch. "It is a violation of international law and the Vietnamese Constitution to detain anyone simply for the peaceful expression of his political views. The Vietnamese government should release all political prisoners and stop persecuting individuals for peaceful political dissent."

Many other human rights advocates and Vietnamese emitters' organizations for democracy, human rights in Vietnam are protesting Hanoi rudeness in treating political and religious peaceful activists, calling for Hanoi government to respond favorably to the similar demands.

In a letter released last week, one of those groups calls on democratic governments, international human rights groups and liberty advocates all over the world to support the struggle for democracy in Vietnam and to deter Hanoi government from persecuting peaceful dissidents.

In a related reaction, the VCP government strongly attacks the recent Resolution 295 of the U.S. House of Representatives, which calls on the VCP regime to respect human rights and freedoms, put an end to repressive measures, revoke the Communist Party's political monopoly, hold fair elections... An editorial of the Hanoi state-controlled radio station, the Voice of Vietnam, states that the resolution is supported by the representatives who want to relieve themselves (from sinful feelings).

Previously, the Hanoi Ministry of Foreign Affairs official - vice-president of the Committee on International Relations - summoned Ambassador Peterson to express Hanoi concern about Resolution 295.

The official criticized the U.S. Representatives or "impending without reason and with great arrogance the normalization of relations with Vietnam, seriously offending the Vietnamese people in its choice of representatives in the previous elections."

Such criticism from Hanoi is a matter of fact. But the responding statement of American Ambassador Douglas Pete Peterson is not.

According to Associated Press, Ambassador Peterson "expressed his regrets, stated that it (Resolution 295) was only the opinion of a minority and not the United States' official stand."

It is incredible that such statement, calling the House of Representatives "a minority," could be made by an American ambassador, especially when Resolution 295 was passed by 415 votes for, only 3 against and 16 abstentions.

In his article broadcast by Me Viet Nam Radio (*) on June 4, 2000, Dr. Lam Le Trinh (**) said that "Ambassador Peterson is proud of his nickname of 'Vietnam's son-in-law'.... and is increasingly supportive of the Communist point of view in matters of human rights and democracy. The son-in-law is behaving more and more like a son."

Some disagree with Dr. Trinh, saying that Peterson is a real Vietnam's son-in-law. But it is as if his father-in-law (Vietnam) were bedridden and he had two brothers-in-law. He is submissive to his wife's wicked brother (Hanoi) who is disrespectful to his parents. Peterson's other brother-in-law is his former combat fellow (nationalist Vietnamese) now in exile, whom he alienates.

Some others even consider Peterson an ambassador of Hanoi to Washington and they have many reasons to say so.

==============