Tran Dai Hung
Vice-President of the Vietnam Lawyers’ Association
Deputy Head of the Party Central Committee’s
Internal Affairs Commission
Since its VIth National Congress in 1986, the Party has attached ongoing importance to renewing and perfecting the contents and mode of its leadership. Perfection of the contents and mode of the Party’s leadership will raise the status and effectiveness of such leadership in this period of industrialization and modernization and requires an examination of the objective requirements of Party leadership over judicial work. Such an inquiry is essential to guaranteeing the successful implementation of a judicial reform strategy in this period of change.
I. Objective bases of Party leadership over judicial work
Judicial work constitutes the organization and operation of bodies responsible for the performance of judicial power, one of the three basic powers of a State governed by law, along with the legislative power and the executive power.
Many resolutions of the Party and particularly the 1992 Constitution have reiterated the goal of developing a socialist-oriented market economy and building a socialist law-governed State of the people, by the people and for the people, under the Party’s leadership. The Party leads the State in all aspects, including the performance of legislative, executive and judicial powers. In Vietnam, State powers are exercised in coordination. Party leadership over judicial work must simultaneously comply with State powers generally and with the particular requirements of judicial power.
The essence of judicial power is manifest in the principle of independence, only abiding by law. This principle of the rule of law, and of a State governed by law, must be associated with the leadership of the Party and the nature of a socialist regime.
The objective bases of the Party’s leadership over judicial work stem not only from the Party’s leading position and role in the State but also from the particularity of judicial work. Perfection of the methods and manner of the Party’s leadership in the area of judicial work is not at odds with the principle of independence, only abiding by law. Rather, in the activities of judicial bodies, such perfection creates a solid foundation for the principle of the rule of law to be best observed in our society.
II. The Party’s leadership over judicial work until now
1. Party leadership over judicial work has led to important achievements in judicial work.
In 1945, the Party led the August Revolution to victory, founding the State of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam with the 1946 Constitution, then the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam with the 1992 Constitution which was amended in 2001. Since then, under the Party’s leadership, important achievements have been accomplished in judicial work. The system of investigative bodies, procuracies, courts, judgment execution agencies and legal support agencies has been built up soundly, step-by-step; a contingent of judicial officials, including investigators, procurators, judges, and executors, has accrued and developed, not to mention a contingent of lawyers, public notaries, people’s jurors, expert witnesses, and other officials and employees performing legal support work and serving the activities of judicial bodies. In addition to the existing system of law schools and legal education, the Judicial Academy, where judicial officials are trained and judicial research is conducted, was set up in 2003. Judicial work has effectively and greatly contributed to the fight against crime and violations of the law, protecting national security as well as social order and safety.
The above achievements amply demonstrate that, since 1986, marked progress has been made through the Party’s leadership in the area of judicial work. The central element of the Party’s leadership in the area of judicial work is that the Party’s viewpoint, based on Marxism-Leninism and the Thought of Ho Chi Minh, is paramount. Particularly in its leadership over the exercise of executive power, the Party has always upheld President Ho Chi Minh’s ideas of “justice, uprightness, modesty, caution and objectivity.” The Party’s civilized and progressive ideologies and views on judicial work have been clearly expressed right from the early days of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam to the current period of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. However, such ideologies and views were not formerly brought into play due to protracted wars and old ways of thinking. Only since the VIIth National Party Congress has the nature of the Party’s leadership in the area of judicial work been defined and substantially improved.
During the Party’s VIIth tenure, the Party Central Committee’s Secretariat issued Directive No. 29/CT-TW on November 9, 1993, on the enhancement of Party leadership over law enforcement bodies, a document which clearly outlined the leadership of Party Committees at all levels over the activities and function of law enforcement bodies, including judicial bodies. The directive touched upon the Party Committees’ responsibilities for multi-faceted leadership over a wide range of activities, from the formation of undertakings and measures to the organization and personnel work, the conduct of inspections, the direct handling of important matters or cases, and the handling of law-breaking officials and Party members. Nevertheless, the scope of powers defined in the directive is still limited. The 8th plenum of the VIIth Party Central Committee adopted a resolution to further consolidate and perfect the State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam which focused on administrative reform and touched on the topic of judicial reform.
In the VIIIth tenure, in 1997, the Party Central Committee’s third plenum adopted a resolution promoting the people’s mastery and further building a strong State of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The resolution outlined in Chapter IV a number of elements of judicial work such as increasing the quality of procuracies; reorganizing investigative agencies; consolidating bodies responsible for the execution of judgments; proposing a judicial police; consolidating and strengthening legal support organizations; and increasing the contingent of honest and well-qualified judicial officials.
The Political Bureau, in 1993, also promulgated Directive No. 29/CT-TW, further solidifying the leadership of Party Committees at all levels over law enforcement bodies. Directive No. 53/CT-TW followed in 2000, setting forth a number of goals to be reached by judicial bodies.
More recently, on January 2, 2002, the Political Bureau adopted Resolution No. 08/NQ-TW setting forth a number of goals for the judiciary and spelling out specific measures for achieving the judicial reform charted out by the 8th plenum of the VIIth Party Central Committee. The Resolution established the Central Steering Committee for Judicial Reform with the State President as its head. Under the Resolution, Party Committees at all levels, the Government, the ministries, branches, People’s Committees, and People’s Councils at all levels are charged to take responsibility and create conditions for the organization and more efficient operation of judicial bodies. As a consequence, the quality of investigation, prosecution and adjudication has been raised; the jurisdiction of the district-level people’s courts has been increased; and the responsibilities of procedural bodies have been heightened. The Resolution also set the task of formulating the strategy on judicial reform in the period of industrialization and modernization from 2006 to 2020.
Apart from mapping out the major elements of judicial work, the Political Bureau and the Secretariat of the Party Central Committee also attached importance to the work of inspecting and supervising judicial activities, to the renewal of the apparatus, and the perfection of functions and tasks of judicial bodies to suit the new situation of the country. Typically, the procuracies shall focus on performing the functions of prosecution and supervision of judicial activities but no longer, as before, the task of supervising the observance of law in the administrative and economic domains; the district-level people’s courts shall be delegated more powers; investigative agencies and judgment execution bodies shall be reorganized and consolidated.
The mode of the Party’s leadership over judicial work has also seen substantial improvement. Prior to the 1990’s, the Party was at a loss in leading the judicial work. Party Committees at various levels promulgated general resolutions but failed to pay heed to the work of inspection and supervision of judicial activities; in many localities, the provincial, municipal or district Party Committees took upon themselves the business of others, performing the functions of judicial bodies. Meanwhile, in other places, the Party Committees relaxed their leadership, having entrusted it to judicial bodies without caring for the conditions under which judicial bodies fulfill their tasks.
Now, things have changed, and the Party’s leadership over judicial work is comprehensive and coordinated, from the elaboration of undertakings and measures to the work of inspection and supervision, organization and personnel, Party building, the building of the contingent of honest and fully capable officials and Party members, and the gradual standardization of the contingent of judicial officials.
Prompted by the need for the judicial work to be independent and abide by the law, the mode of the Party’s leadership in this domain must be based on the principle that the Party Committees perform the leadership through Party organizations and members within the judicial agencies. The Party must, on the one hand, exercise its comprehensive and sometimes direct leadership over judicial work, and, on the other hand, not deeply intervene in activities of judicial bodies, performing the latter’s function. The Party Committees at various levels are basically of one mind now in their perception and actions regarding the scope of the Party’s leadership over the judicial work.
2. Limitations and weaknesses in the Party’s leadership over the judicial work
First, the contents and manner of Party leadership remain slow to change as compared to the Party’s leadership over economic development, as could be seen in the late formulation of a strategy on judicial work. Judicial reform should have been carried out simultaneously with or one step ahead the economic reform so as to pave the way for economic and social relations to develop.
Second, the scope of the Party’s leadership in the area of the judicial work remains uncoordinated in different domains, as seen in the organization and operation of judicial bodies out of balance with legal support agencies; the instability in their organizational apparatus and contingent of officials; their inadequate material foundations; and poor-quality investigation, prosecution and adjudication.
Third, the Party’s leadership role in the area of judicial work has not been widely regularized and has even been ignored by some Party Committees and organizations. Many provincial-, municipal- or district-level Party Committees have failed to formulate statutes for their leadership over judicial bodies, failed to elaborate mechanisms for coordination in direction and the handling of matters related to judicial work, particularly in the handling of important and complicated matters or cases.
Fourth, the advisory agencies assisting the Party Committees in judicial work are not strong enough and remain unstable, with an inadequate contingent of qualified and experienced officials at central and local levels.
III. Some proposals on perfection of the manner and methods of the Party’s leadership in the area of judicial work
Prompted by the above-described situation, particularly the requirements of judicial work in this period of national industrialization and modernization in the spirit of the Party’s platform on national construction in the period of transition to socialism and subsequent resolutions on economic development, maintenance of security, defense, social order and safety, we should continue renewing the contents and mode of the Party’s leadership along the following lines:
1. The strategy on judicial reform in the period of industrialization and modernization must be drawn up with comprehensive contents covering from the organizational apparatus and functions and tasks of judicial bodies as well as legal support agencies to coordinated economic and social solutions in support of judicial activities.
2. The contents of Party Committees’ leadership over judicial work should focus on the realization of the Party’s strategy on judicial reform with specific measures compatible with the leading position and scope of each level. The program of action of each Party organization in judicial bodies and legal support agencies shall be worked out for each certain period.
3. Progress obtained in the contents and mode of the Party Committee’s leadership in the area of judicial work should be promoted; existing limitations and weaknesses should be overcome through various measures, including the regularization of functions, tasks, leadership of Party Committees, and Party organizations in relation to the system of judicial bodies and legal support agencies; the regularization of coordination among judicial bodies as well as between judicial bodies and the concerned State agencies in performing judicial work; enhancement of the Party’s inspection of judicial bodies in materializing the Party’s viewpoints, lines and policies on judicial work; enhancement of supervision by the National Assembly, People’s Councils at all levels, mass organizations and other social organizations over activities of judicial bodies; and raising the leading capacity of Party Committees from the central to local levels as well as of functional branches over judicial work.-