The South Africa – Viet Nam Rhino Horn Trade Nexus (PDF ... - WWF

situation at the end-use market: viet nam
Rhino horns being smuggled in luggage.
liza sTeyn/saps
Since then there are indications that the Vietnamese authorities are attempting to undertake some kind
of survey of known importers of rhino horn trophies. Presently, however, there is no evidence to suggest
that any individuals who were the recipients of legal sport hunted trophies from South Africa have
ever subsequently been arrested and prosecuted for failing to prevent their rhino horn trophies from
entering commercial trade.
Overall, and not dissimilar to the problematic situation facing almost all other aspects of the Viet Nam’s
burgeoning wildlife trade, it is apparent that rhino horn crime has not been made a government priority
for active attention. A further worrying and possibly related issue concerns the extent of corruption in
the country. A 2012 survey by the Viet Nam Chamber of Commerce and Industry reported that nearly
half of Viet Nam’s companies have had to bribe officials in order to do business (Cassin, 2012). The anticorruption
organization Transparency International ranks Viet Nam in the top one-third of world’s most
corrupt countries. The Business Anti-Corruption Portal, a comprehensive and practical business tool to
help businesses avoid and fight corruption, says:
Vietnam is in a phase of transition from a centrally planned economy to a “market economy with
socialist orientation”. Vietnam’s efforts to attract foreign investment have led the ruling party to seek to
improve the business climate for foreign investors. This involves attempts to combat corruption which is
rampant throughout the country and permeates the activities of the many state companies that still
dominate the economy’s strategic sectors. The lack of implementation and weak enforcement mean corruption
continues to be cited as one of the most problematic factors for doing business in the country
(Anon., 2012).
Recent comparative evaluations of governance issues at the global level have indicated that corruption
remains a rampant and serious issue in Viet Nam:
An annual survey by Political and Economic Risk Consultancy, a Hong Kong consulting firm, indicates
that in Asia, only Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines and India are more corrupt than Vietnam. On a
scale from 0 to 10, with 10 indicating extreme tolerance for corruption, Vietnam earns a score of 8.3 in
the PERC survey this year. The PERC report says many factors contribute to corruption in Vietnam,
including the fact the public sector is much bigger than the private one, while average government salaries
are low. It says the police, the taxation and licensing agencies and the stock market are considered
the most corrupt sectors (Nguyen, 2011).
Against this backdrop, a range of sources continue to report ongoing collusion between vendors of illegal
wildlife commodities and the law enforcement agencies charged with the protection of endangered
species and control of banned substances in the marketplace (Nguyen and Nguyen, 2008; Smith,
2012b). In fact, until very recently, denial of any kind of rhino horn trade problem at all has been a
consistent refrain from Vietnamese government officials. During bilateral deliberations between South
African law enforcement officers and their Vietnamese counterparts in Hanoi in October 2010, for
example, the notion that Viet Nam only played the role of a transit country for onward trade to China
was repeatedly heard through a succession of meetings with Forest Protection Department,
Environmental Police and Customs officers. As further discussed below, there is very limited evidence
of cross-border rhino horn trade between the two countries to support any such contention credibly.
In comparison to South Africa, seizures of rhino horn at Viet Nam’s two international airports in Hanoi
and Ho Chi Minh City have been relatively infrequent, but continuing (albeit unsubstantiated) anecdotal
reports of government complicity in allowing “free passage” and “protection” continue to surface,
for example the story of the wealthy woman who reportedly brought seven horns from South
Africa into Viet Nam:
[She] said it had all been arranged through official connections. Nga sipped her coffee and said the
woman was extremely nervous about having the horns, which was why she insisted on secrecy. Nga said
that without the right contacts it wouldn’t have been possible to smuggle it in. “Ordinary people couldn’t
do it,” because it is “so illegal” (Smith, 2012b).
Other stories indicate that individuals apparently located at key international airports function as
important sources of rhino horn, although it is not clear whether the horns in question were previously
seized or not:
I told her I was interested in buying some because my father has cancer and rhino horn was not available
in Australia; she said it was a good idea to buy some for him and she would like to help me. She
called her uncle then and there and he said he’d make enquiries. He came back saying his contacts at
Saigon’s Tan Son Nhat International Airport didn’t have any [rhino horn] at present (Smith, 2012b).
And once inside the country, other individuals with rhino horn apparently remain unconcerned about
the potential consequences of having an illegal substance because of the perception that their personal
contacts and connections resulted in protective immunity:
Diem added that her mother … was not concerned about the illegality of the rhino horn because of her
connections with Hanoi’s Vien kiem sat nhan dan (The People’s Court of Investigation). With connections
like these her mother could do “whatever she wanted”. Diem smiled broadly saying she was happy
to get some for me if I wanted at which point my friend changed the subject (Smith, 2012b).
“Protection”, if it indeed exists at all, is not necessarily pervasive as rhino horn seizures have taken
place on numerous occasions, both at Noi Bai International Airport in Hanoi in the north and Tan Son
Nhat International Airport in Ho Chi Minh City in the south, as well as at various border crossings
along the Lao border and in the marketplace, especially in Hanoi. According to the Forest Protection
Department, by mid-2009, approximately 100 kg of rhino horns had been seized and were being stored
at the National Treasury as valuable commodities (Vice-Director of VN CITES MA, pers. comm., June
2009). Since then, the Vietnamese government has reported that, from 2006 through 2008, 12 seizure
cases have occurred at the country’s international airports, yielding a total of 118 kg of rhino horn
(Tung, 2011). News reports and other published sources available to TRAFFIC yield details on seven
such rhino horn seizures that were made at Viet Nam’s international airports since 2004:
In October 2004, a “young” Vietnamese student who was studying at Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, was apprehended at Hanoi’s Noi Bai International Airport carrying
two White Rhino horns, totalling 10.75 kg. The suspect, who had previously worked in Angola for two
years before coming to South Africa for studies, claimed to have bought the horns from a local man on
a farm near Johannesburg for USD11 000. This individual was reportedly expelled from school and was
given a two-year suspended prison sentence on probation by the People’s Court of Hanoi (Tien, 2006).
In November 2004, a man was detected carrying four rhino horns which were seized by Customs officers at
Noi Bai International Airport upon his arrival in Vietnam. Reportedly the director of a company based in
140 the south africa – viet nam rhino horn trade nexus TRAFFIC 141