Translation
CENTRAL COMMITTEE*
Number: 49-NQ/TW / COMMUNIST PARTY OF VIETNAM
------
Hanoi, 2 June 2005
RESOLUTION
OF THE POLITBURO OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF VIETNAM
on the
Judicial Reform Strategy to 2020
Over the past years, in implementation of Party resolutions, especially Politburo Resolution No. 08-NQ/TW, dated 02-10-2002, on “some focus on judicial duties in the coming time,” judicial reform tasks have made significant progress under the leadership and with the high commitment of Party units. Awareness of and attention to judicial duties have been changed in a positive way. The quality of judicial performance has been advanced a step forward, which has contributed to ensuring political security and social order and created a stable environment for economic development, international integration, development, and defence of the Fatherland.
However, these are initial achievements that focused on addressing the most urgent issues. Judicial duties still have many weaknesses. Criminal policy, as well as civil legislation and laws on judicial procedure have outdated elements and have been slowly revised and amended. The organisation, mandates, tasks, and operational mechanisms of judicial organs seem unreasonable in many aspects. There is still a shortage of judicial and judicial support staff. The professional qualifications and political ability of some officials are low. Some of them even have very low personal qualifications, morals, and professional accountability. There have been a number of wrongful decisions in investigations, arrests and detentions, prosecutions, and trials. The infrastructure of the working facilities of judicial organs are insufficient and outdated.
Given the above mentioned shortcomings, the task of judicial reform faces many challenges. Crime development trends become more complicated and of increasing seriousness in terms of their nature and consequences. Administrative complaints, and civil, economic, and labour disputes, as well as disputes with foreign elements, have a tendency to increase in terms of quantity and their complexity and diversity. The demands of the people and society upon judicial organs are raised, in the sense that the former must be a place for the people to turn to when seeking justice or the protection of human rights, as well an efficient tool to uphold the law and socialist legality and fight effectively against crime and offences .
The task of the development and defence of the Fatherland and the demands of building a rule of law state in Vietnam require the promulgation and implementation of a Strategy for Judicial Reform to 2020 that should be accord with the renovation process for legislative duties and the public administration reform programme.
- Objectives and principles guiding judicial reform
1. Objective: Building an ethical, healthy, strong, democratic, strict, fair and justice- protecting judiciary, as well as ensuring that the judiciary will be modernised on a step-by-step basis to serve the Socialist Fatherland of Vietnam and its people and that judicial activities, among which adjudication plays the key role, will be highly efficient and effective.
2. Basic principles:
2.1 Judicial reform must be put under the leadership of the Party and aim to maintain political stability and firmly preserve the nature of our State as a socialist rule-of-law State of the people, by the people, and for the people, as well as to ensure the unified power of the State, along with the distributions and collaboration between state bodies in the exercise of legislative, executive and judicial powers.
2.2 Judicial reform must stem from the requirements of socio-economic development and building an equitable, democratic, and civilised society; actively serve and promote socio-economic development; steadfastly defend the nation; and ensure the linkage between socialist democratic development and the renovation of legislative work and public administration reform.
2.3 The combined strength of the entire society must be mobilised in the judicial reform process. Judicial and judicial support organs must by put under the oversight of the people-elected bodies and of the people.
2.4 Judicial reform must stem from Viet Nam’s legal traditions and the past achievements of the socialist judiciary of Viet Nam, and selectively adopt international experiences in line with specific context of the country and the requirements of the proactive international integration and future social development trends.
2.5 Judicial reform must be carried out in a fast, comprehensive and focused manner and through solid steps.
II. Orientation and tasks of judicial reforms
1. Orientations
1.1. Improving criminal and civil policy and legislation in line with the socialist-oriented market economy; building Vietnam’s socialist rule-of-law State of the people, by the people, and for the people; improving judicial procedures to ensure that they will be consistent, democratic, and transparent, as well as respect and protect human rights.
1.2. Organising judicial organs and judicial support institutions in a proper and scientific manner, with modern organisational structures and working conditions/facilities, of which the court sector is placed at the centre and adjudication plays the key role; realising strong socialisation of judicial support activities.
1.3. Building a strong contingent of judicial and support staff, especially officials holding judicial posts, by enhancing their legal responsibility and authority, as well as by introducing higher specialised standards for each category of staff: for example, political and ethical qualities, professional and technical capacity, as well as social knowledge and experience; and adopting a mechanism for recruiting and appointing officials for some judicial posts through examinations.
1.4. Renovating and enhancing the oversight role of elected bodies, the public, and the people’s ownership of judicial activities.
2. Tasks of judicial reform
2.1. Improving criminal and civil policy and legislation, as well as judicial procedures
Improving, as early as possible, the legal framework for the judiciary in line with the objectives of the Legal System Development Strategy. Paying great attention to the improvement of criminal policy and judicial procedures; [and] improving the effectiveness of crime prevention efforts and the educational effects of adjudication. Reducing prison sentences; increasing the application of financial penalties and non-custodial re-education measures for some crimes. Reducing the number of death sentences so as only to apply to some extremely dangerous crimes. Lowering the currently excessively high ceilings for the punishment for some crimes. Redressing the criminalisation of economic and civil relations and the omission of criminal offences. Recognising some socially dangerous offences, which have emerged in the recent process of socio-economic, scientific, and technological development, as well as international integration, as crimes.
Placing higher criminal liability on those officials who abuse their law enforcement capacity, as well as their positions and power, to commit crimes. Higher-level officials who abuse their positions and power to commit crimes will be punished more severely to warn others.
Developing a mechanism to utilise the strengths of the people, agencies and mass organisations to prevent and detect corrupt practices; protecting those who detect, report, investigate, prosecute, or adjudicate corrupt practices; rewarding those who have made great contributions to the fight against corruption; holding heads of agencies and organisations responsible for the prevention and control of corruption.
Improving civil legislation [to] protect the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and organisations in their transactions [and to] promote the healthy development of civil relations. Improving the institutions regulating contractual arrangements, compensation, indemnity, refunds, et cetera.
Making a clear distinction between administrative management and judicial authority and jurisdiction in the process of litigation by increasing the authority and responsibility of investigators, prosecutors, and judges to enable them to proactively perform their tasks and enhancing their independence and accountability in making appropriate judicial decisions. Identifying clear grounds and a sound basis for application of detention measures, limiting the application of detention measures to certain crimes and narrowing the categories of officials who have the authority to make decisions on the application of detention measures.
Improving, on a step-by-step basis, the appeal and re-trial procedures by virtue of defining strict grounds for granting leave to rehear cases where a final judgment/decision has been delivered, as well as clearly defining the responsibilities of those who have the power to grant leave, in order to avoid the excessive occurrence of groundless grants. Developing and introducing simplified and summary procedures applicable to select cases.
Further improving civil procedures. Exploring the possibility of establishing and developing State services to facilitate the proactive gathering of evidence and collection of proof by litigants in order to protect their rights and legitimate interests. Renovating administrative procedures within judicial bodies to provide favourable conditions for the people to access justice. A litigant is expected to fill a claim with a court, which then has a duty to accept the claim and take follow-up action. Encouraging the settlement of conflicts by using alternative dispute resolution, such as bargaining, conciliation, mediation, or arbitration, through court support for legal recognition of such settlements.
Expanding court jurisdiction concerning administrative complaints. Moving, incrementally, towards the publication of court judgments, except those cases involving crimes against national security, social morality or traditional ethical values. Introducing a mechanism to ensure that every legally binding court judgment is enforced and that the State's administrative bodies, which are subject to court decisions, comply strictly with related court judgments.
2.2. Building and developing the organisational structures of judicial organs with a focus on the organisation and functioning of the people's courts
Reorganising the court system in such a way that the courts will be jurisdiction-based, rather than the existing geographic affiliation. The court system will consist of first instance regional courts, each of which will be set up in one or more geographic administrative units, at the district level; appellate courts responsible primarily for hearing appeals and protests against the decisions of the courts of first instance, as well as trying select cases in the capacity of courts of first instance; high courts, to be established on a regional basis, with appellate jurisdiction; and the Supreme People's Court responsible for summarising adjudication experience, issuing guidelines on uniform and consistent law application, developing judicial precedent, and reviewing or retrying cases. Ensuring that the establishment of specialised courts takes into account the actual adjudication practice of each court level in each region. Reorganising the Supreme People's Court to make it more streamlined and capable by having leading legal experts in relevant fields and highly experienced practitioners fill the bench of the Supreme People’s Court.
Studying and defining a reasonable scope of jurisdiction of military courts in a view that these courts will mainly deal with cases relating to violation of duties and obligations of solders and army members or military confidentialities.
Renovating the method for conducting trials in the courtroom by defining more clearly the status, powers, and responsibilities of litigators and other parties involved in litigation so as to ensure transparency, democracy, and discipline; improving the quality of adversarial litigation in all trials and hearings, which might be seen as a breakthrough in judicial activity.
In the meantime, procuracy organs will maintain their current mandate to prosecute and supervise judicial activity. The people’s procuracy system and will be re-organised in line with the new organisational structure of the court sector. . The possibility of turning the procuracy organs into public prosecution organs, which will have prosecution functions and directly guide investigation work, will be explored.
Clearly dividing duties and responsibilities between investigation organs and other agencies which are also mandated to do some investigation work as follows: the former will investigate all criminal cases, while the latter will only carry out some preliminary investigation activities and some investigation measures as requested by the former. In the meantime, the organisational structure model of investigation organs specified in the current legislations will be maintained, while conducting research/study on reorganization of the system of investigation organs in a view to reduce the number of focal points and prosecutors guiding investigation work; and closely combine reconnaissance and criminal investigation activities.
Making available staff and physical infrastructure for the Ministry of Justice to assist the Government in carrying out the unified management of court judgments and decision enforcement. Clearly identifying the responsibilities of the Commune People’s Committees and of their related specialised bodies in the execution of non-custodial sentences in order to ensure strict enforcement of court judgments and decisions. Realising, on a gradual basis, socialisation, as well as introducing formats and procedures for transferring some work in the area of court judgments and decision execution to non-state organisations and agencies.
2.3. Improving judicial support institutions
Training and developing a corps of lawyers with good political and ethical qualities and high professional competence. Improving the mechanism for enabling lawyers to perform effective adversarial litigation during trials and hearings, while clearly defining lawyers' responsibilities. Ensuring that the State will create favourable legal conditions to promote the self-management status of lawyers' organisations, [while] enhancing the responsibility of lawyers' organisations towards their members.
Improving judicial examination/verification institutions. Increasing the State’s investment in some areas to ensure a constant response to the great judicial examination and verification demand in litigation. Realising socialisation in some other areas, where judicial examination and verification demand is not so great or not regularised. Providing clear and strict sequences, procedures, and timelines for requesting and carrying out judicial examination and verification work. Clearly defining standards for assessment of conclusions of judicial examination and verification to ensure that the judicial examination and verification are objective and appropriate that can be used as foundations for deciding the cases at hand.
Establishing an official judicial police to provide timely support for adjudication activities and court judgment and decision enforcement, et cetera.
Improving public notary institutions. Clearly identifying the scope of public notarisation and certification; clearly defining the legal value of notarised documents. Building a model for the state management of public notary services in the view that the State will set up only relevant notarisation authorities, while exploring appropriate steps to socialise this service gradually in the future.
Exploring the possibility of developing an institution of bailiffs (executors). In a short term, organising pilot exercises in some localities for a certain period, and then conducting their review and evaluation to provide the basis for further steps.
2.4. Building an ethical, healthy, and strong corps of judicial and support staff
Further renovating the curricula and methodology for university level legal education and training of potential officials for judicial and support posts; improving the capacity of judicial and support staff by providing them with updated political, legal, economic, and social information, as well as with higher professional skills and practical knowledge, and clean morality and brave for defending justice and socialist legality. Developing Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City Law Universities. Upgrading the Judicial Academy to a large judicial staff training centre.
Developing a mechanism for attracting and recruiting people with strong commitment, high ethical qualities, and talent to work in judicial organs. Expanding the pool of potential personnel for appointment to judicial posts so that not only officials of judicial organs but also jurists and lawyers can be appointed to judicial positions. Exploring the possibility of replacing the current judicial appointment and recruitment modality by an examination-based appointment and recruitment procedure. Extending the terms of office of judicial staff or adopting appointments without fixed terms.
Developing an appropriate salary and award policy related to judicial staff’s work. Increasing checks and inspections, including external checks and inspections, of the performance of judicial staff’s activities.
2.5. Improving the oversight mechanism for elected bodies and enhancing the people’s ownership of the judiciary
Renovating and improving the quality of questions of National Assembly and People’s Council deputies to judicial organs, as well as the quality of the latter’s related reports and answers in National Assembly and People’s Council sessions. Ensuring that the National Assembly and People’s Councils will adopt separate resolutions on judicial activities based on such reports and answers heard in session.
Intensifying oversight of performance and compliance of judicial organs with the law, especially their leaders. Establishing a Judiciary Committee of the National Assembly to assist the National Assembly in exercising its oversight of judicial activities, with a focus on arrest, detention, prosecution, and adjudication.
Promoting the people's ownership of judicial activities. Strengthening legal advocacy, dissemination, and education. Continuously improving every citizen's legal knowledge and consciousness of living and working in compliance with the Constitution and law. Ensuring that the Fatherland Front and its member organisations fulfil the task of encouraging people to detect the constraints and shortcomings of judicial organs and request these organs to redress and correct them. Enhancing the role of the mass media in advocating for and disseminating information about judicial activities.
2.6. Strengthening international cooperation in the judicial sector
Organising effective implementation of the international treaties which Viet Nam has signed or to which it has acceded. Signing judicial assistance agreements with other countries, especially neighbouring countries, other countries in the region, and countries traditionally having relations with Viet Nam.