On the afternoon of 7/10, the trial in the Central Institute of Forensic Psychiatry case concluded with sentences ranging from a 12-month suspended sentence to 30 years in prison for 65 defendants across 10 groups of charges.

The court panel deemed the case particularly severe, not only because the violations persisted for many years at an assessment facility directly linked to judicial activities, but also because numerous officials, doctors, nurses, and judicial staff were drawn into a cycle of money and personal gain.

Beyond accepting bribes to facilitate detainees, the verdict also highlighted another loophole: the duration of mandatory treatment is deducted from the sentence served. This humane regulation was exploited by some individuals to manipulate psychiatric assessment results, exchanging them for sums ranging from tens of millions to billions of VND.

Based on these findings, the Hanoi People's Court issued a series of recommendations to the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Health.

>>See details of the sentences for the 65 individuals

Forensic psychiatric institute needs 24/7 police protection

One of the most significant shortcomings, according to the court panel, lay in the management of detainees undergoing mandatory treatment. Before entering the institute, they were held and controlled by specialized forces using various measures; however, once transferred for treatment, direct responsibility shifted to doctors and nurses.

In court, one nurse described this situation as the "last line of defense," yet those manning this defense were only trained in medical expertise, lacking professional skills to handle offenders, without support tools, and with no specialized forces on duty.

In some instances, when requests to leave were denied, patients attacked staff. Such assaults, according to nurses, were almost considered inevitable because the perpetrators were suffering from mental illness.

The case also revealed that the final "gate" before detainees left the institute was guarded by four security personnel aged 62 to 69. One individual even testified that they did not realize providing information to detainees was a violation.

Despite the modest amounts received, each person was sentenced to two to three years in prison due to the consequences of their actions.

Addressing this loophole, the court proposed that the Ministry of Public Security include psychiatric assessment and mandatory treatment facilities in the list of units and targets requiring protection, and deploy armed forces for 24/7 monitoring to ensure security and safety.

Former institute director Tran Van Truong. Photo: Danh Lam

Tightening procedures, enforcing accountability in psychiatric assessment

The second gap was found within the assessment process itself.

According to the court panel, there is currently no sufficiently robust oversight mechanism for psychiatric assessment results. Prosecuting agencies remain highly dependent on the conclusions of forensic institutes, while no higher-level council exists to regularly supervise, review, or revoke results when signs of bias emerge.

Another issue is that members of the assessment council often belong to the same unit. When subject to a shared management mechanism, their professional independence may be compromised.

Under current procedures, upon a decision to request an assessment, the institute director assigns a council of three people: one chair, one member, and one secretary. Results are based on direct examination, with all three signing to confirm; any differing opinions must be clearly recorded in the conclusion.

However, this case showed instances where all three members accepted bribes to falsify results in 26 cases, instructing detainees to "act out" psychiatric symptoms, then collectively signing conclusions stating a loss of cognitive and behavioral control.

To rectify this, the court panel recommended that the Ministry of Health mandate that assessment councils include members from different units and medical facilities, to enhance independence and limit the influence of internal mechanisms.

The court also proposed that for cases of abandoned treatment, escape, or unusual behavior during mandatory treatment, re-assessment should be considered before concluding a loss of cognitive and behavioral control or applying mandatory treatment measures.

Thanh Lam - Pham Du