WHEN WRONGFULLY TRIED AND CONVICTED: WHAT MUST BE DONE TO SEEK REDRESS ? (Perspectives from First-Instance and Appellate Trials to Cassation – Through Landmark Miscarriage of Justice Cases)

1. Legal Basis for Protecting the Wrongfully Convicted

The 2013 Constitution affirms the Presumption of Innocence in Article 31. The 2015 Criminal Procedure Code further concretizes this principle in Article 13, while mandating the determination of the objective and comprehensive truth of the case (Article 15). When these principles are violated, leading to a wrongful conviction, the convict has the right to request a review of the judgment through statutory procedures.

2. Redress at the First-Instance Stage – The Right to Appeal

According to Article 331 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code, defendants have the right to appeal a first-instance judgment if they believe they have been wrongfully convicted. The time limit for appeal is 15 days (Article 333). Practice shows that if a defendant fails to exercise their right to appeal or provides an unclear appeal, the case can easily be "finalized" right from the first-instance level.

3. Appellate Review – A Crucial Opportunity to Rectify Errors

Appellate trial is a judicial level of particular significance in overcoming wrongful convictions. Under Article 355 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Appellate Court has the power to annul or amend the judgment, or declare the defendant not guilty.

The case of Mr. Nguyen Thanh Chan (Bac Giang) is a typical example. Initially sentenced to life imprisonment at both first-instance and appellate levels, after years of pleading innocence and the intervention of procedural agencies, the case was reviewed under special procedures, leading to his full exoneration.

4. Seeking Redress via Cassation Procedures – The Final Recourse

Cassation is a special procedure to review judgments that have already taken legal effect when there are serious procedural violations or grave errors in the application of law (Article 371, 2015 Criminal Procedure Code).

The case of Mr. Huynh Van Nen (Binh Thuận) demonstrates the decisive role of this procedure. Mr. Nen was wrongfully convicted and served over 17 years in prison for two different cases. Only when the judgments were challenged through cassation were the sentences overturned, and he was officially exonerated.

Another instance is the case of Ho Duy Hai in the Cau Voi Post Office case. Despite ongoing controversies, this case highlights the importance of reviewing judgments via cassation procedures when there are signs of serious procedural violations.

5. Legal Consequences After Exoneration

Persons wrongfully convicted have the right to a public apology, public rectification, and compensation for damages under the 2017 Law on State Compensation Liability. This is not only material compensation but also an acknowledgment of the State's responsibility for judicial errors.

6. Conclusion

Seeking redress is not just a journey to find justice for an individual; it is a measure of the humanity and progress of a judicial system. Ensuring the right to appeal, protest, and review judgments is the way for the law to self-correct errors made during investigation, prosecution, and trial.

 

The information contained in this article is general and intended only to provide information on legal regulations. DB Legal will not be responsible for any use or application of this information for any business purpose. For in-depth advice on specific cases, please contact us.

For more information: 

📞: +84 357 466 579

📧: contact@dblegal.vn

🌐Facebook:  DB Legal Vietnamese Fanpage or DB Legal English Fanpage 

🐦X(Twitter)

💼Linkedin

🎬Youtube