In his petition dated September 19, he demanded an immediate end to the ongoing construction of a park and a public library on the land lot, and the return of the land to Hanoi diocese for religious practice. He claimed that the land is the private property of Hanoi diocese.

At a working session with the Hanoi Municipal People’s Committee the same day, Kiet refused municipal leaders’ offer of other land lots to Hanoi diocese, saying that the diocese only wants that piece of land. This raises the question as to whether the land lot at 42 Nha Chung Street is the only place that could be used for religious practice, while many other religious sects have received land from local administrations to build places of worship.

In fact, Kiet is not too ignorant to understand that the land lot is not his own private property nor belongs to any organisation. No one denies that land is the property of the State, something that Vietnamese people, including Catholics, have sacrificed themselves for generations to defend.

The facts speak for themselves: the land lot at 42 Nha Chung Street has never belonged to Hanoi diocese. Official documents show that when invading Vietnam, French colonialists took over this area to build places of worship for Catholics. Later in 1961, priest Nguyen Tung Cuong, who was in charge of Hanoi diocese, handed over the land to the State. Despite this fact, Kiet has tried to distort the legality of official State documents, including National Assembly resolution No. 23, which stipulates that the State will not consider any claims to pieces of land subject to State management mentioned in land reform policies before 1991.

Judging from his acts, Kiet is still grieving over the fall of the French regime, which was brought to an end in 1945 by the August Revolution and the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (now the Socialist Republic of Vietnam).

In his petition, Kiet openly declared that the diocese would defend the right to use the land lot at 42 Nha Chung Street at any cost. No doubt, he has danced to the tune of reactionary forces. By distorting the truth and slandering the administration, he has challenged the State and the Government.

Why so? It is because he wants to incite Catholics to carry out law-breaking activities against the administration in the above-mentioned areas.

One thing is for sure: most of citizens, Catholic or not, have seen Kiet’s true colours. For faithful Catholics, Jesus Christ is sacred and priests must love people. But Kiet goes against God’s teachings, and the nation’s moral ethics by saying, “we feel ashamed of holding the Vietnamese passports when going abroad”. How can Vietnamese people, including Catholics, tolerate such a religious dignitary who has no love for his homeland and cares nothing about his roots?