On the morning of June 14, 2023, the Faculty of Administrative Law and State at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Law organized a faculty-level conference titled “Enhancing the Legal Framework for Complaints in Vietnam Today” at Auditorium A1002, Nguyen Tat Thanh Campus.
The conference was attended by PhD. Nguyen Manh Hung, Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State; PhD. Dang Tat Dung, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State; LLM. Nguyen Van Tri, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State; PhD. Le Viet Son, Deputy Dean of the Department of Administrative Procedure Law; PhD. Nguyen Thi Ngoc Mai, Dean of the Department of Theory of State and Law; PhD. Tran Thi Thu Ha, Deputy Dean of the Department of Administrative Law; LLM. Tran Thi Thu Ha, Deputy Dean of the Department of Constitutional Law, and other lecturers of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State.
As for the invited guests, the conference had the participation of Ms. Phan Thi Binh Thuan, Vice Chairwoman of the Inspection Commission of the Ho Chi Minh City Party Committee; Mr. Vu Anh Tai, Officer of the People's Council of Ho Chi Minh City; Ms. Duong Thi Thanh Binh, Inspector of the Inspectorate of Thu Duc City; Mr. Ho Quang Chanh, Inspector of the Inspectorate of District 12; Mr. Nguyen Son Lam, Director of Nam Tri Viet Law Firm; LLM. Nguyen Tu Anh, Deputy Head of the Inspection Division at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Law; Dr. Dinh Thi Cam Ha, Lecturer at Hong Bang International University; Ms. Nguyen Thi Hai Van, Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City, along with approximately 150 students from various faculties and classes in the Advanced programs.
The conference commenced with the opening speech by PhD. Nguyen Manh Hung, Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State. In his speech, he emphasized the rationale and significance of organizing the conference: “The Law on Complaints No. 02/2011/QH13 (2011 Law on Complaints) was passed by the National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 13th Legislature, 2nd Session on November 11, 2011. Over nearly 12 years of implementation, the 2011 Law on Complaints has established an important legal framework for ensuring the exercise of complaint rights by individuals, agencies, and organizations, as well as the responsibility to resolve complaints by competent authorities within state agencies. Alongside the achievements mentioned above, the practical aspects of complaints and their resolution have also faced certain limitations and shortcomings during this time, such as a low rate of complaint resolution, slow processing, inadequate quality and effectiveness in resolving complaints. Many cases of complaint resolution do not adhere to the legal regulations. One of the leading causes contributing to these issues is that the legal provisions concerning complaints have revealed certain deficiencies. Therefore, the legal provisions regarding complaints need to be improved promptly. To contribute theoretical and legal foundations to the improvement of legal provisions concerning complaints, the organization of the faculty-level conference “Enhancing the Legal Framework for Complaints in Vietnam Today” in the current context is of urgent topic for both legal theory and practical science.”
Image: PhD. Nguyen Manh Hung - Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State, gave the opening speech at the conference, affirming that the conference would hold significant importance for teaching, learning, and research.
The presentation session was moderated by three chairpersons, including PhD. Nguyen Manh Hung, Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State; PhD. Dang Tat Dung, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State; LLM. Nguyen Van Tri, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Administrative Law and State
Image: The Chairpersons of the department-level scientific conference “Enhancing the Legal Framework for Complaints in Vietnam Today”
The conference featured 13 presentations by lecturers, experts, and scientists from within and outside the faculty. All presentations were of high quality and focused on the key issues the conference aimed to address. However, due to time constraints, the organizing committee selected only 5 presentations from 5 experts to be delivered during the conference. At the same time, to emphasize the main objectives, the conference aimed to cover the following topics: (1) Clarifying fundamental theoretical issues related to complaints and complaint resolution; (2) Analyzing the provisions of the 2011 Law on Complaints and related legal normative documents; (3) Evaluating the shortcomings and limitations in the legal provisions on complaints and proposing recommendations and revisions to address these deficiencies.
The first presentation was delivered by PhD. Le Viet Son, representing the research group (Assoc. Prof. PhD. Vu Van Nhiem and PhD. Le Viet Son) on the topic “Improving the regulations on complaint subjects under the complaints law.” In this presentation, the authors clarified the complaint subjects as defined by the 2011 Law on Complaints. Consequently, the authors identified four limitations and deficiencies in the 2011 Law on Complaints concerning complaint subjects. First, defining complaint subjects in a narrow and limiting manner restricts the complaint rights of individuals, agencies, and organizations. Second, there is inconsistency in the provisions of the complaints law and administrative procedure law regarding complaint subjects and plaintiffs in administrative litigation cases. Third, excluding all administrative decisions containing legal norms and administrative decisions and actions within state agencies from the right to complain is inappropriate. Fourth, some content related to complaint subjects lacks clear explanations. Based on these limitations, the authors proposed the following improvements: First, the 2011 Law on Complaints should aim to broaden the definition of complaint subjects to include all administrative management activities that cause harm as potential complaint subjects, rather than specifying them in a particular form as currently stipulated. This would be of significant importance in ensuring the absolute complaint rights of individuals, agencies, and organizations affected by the public duties of state agencies and authorized individuals. Second, to ensure consistency with the Administrative Procedure Law, the 2011 Law on Complaints should be amended to include administrative decisions and administrative actions carried out by state agencies and organizations authorized to perform state administrative management functions as complaint subjects. Third, the 2011 Law on Complaints should aim to extend the right to complain regarding certain types of normative decisions and administrative documents to strengthen the complaint rights of citizens and enhance the public’s oversight of administrative management activities, thereby improving the effectiveness of state governance. Fourth, to provide clearer guidance on complaint subjects, the authors recommended further clarification of the term “administrative management activities.” Additionally, they suggested providing a clearer explanation of the phrase “administrative decisions and actions that are not directly related to the legal rights and legitimate interests of the complainant” and elaborating on the forms of “documents” within the scope of complaint subjects as administrative decisions.
The second presentation, “Regarding the Jurisdiction of Complaint Resolution under the 2011 Law on Complaints,” by LLM. Truong Thi Minh Thuy, focused on a direct research into the provisions of the 2011 Law on Complaints concerning the jurisdiction of complaint resolution. The presentation also identified certain shortcomings and proposed improvements. The author highlighted the limitations in the provisions of the 2011 Law on Complaints regarding jurisdiction for complaint resolution as follows: Firstly, there is inconsistency in the provisions regarding jurisdiction for complaint resolution and the complaint procedure between Article 7, and Articles 17, 19, 20, 22, and 23. Therefore, the author proposed amending Article 7 of the 2011 Law on Complaints to read as follows: “When there is reason to believe that an administrative decision or administrative action is contrary to the law, directly infringing upon their legal rights and interests, the complainant shall, for the first complaint, either submit the complaint to the competent authority for complaint resolution as stipulated in Chapter 3, Section 1 of this Law or initiate administrative litigation in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Law.” Secondly, there is inconsistency in the terminology and usage of terms with the Law on Organization of the Local Government. To ensure terminological consistency, the author proposed amending Article 17 of the 2011 Law on Complaints as follows: “The Chairperson of the People’s Committee at the commune, ward, or township level (hereinafter referred to collectively as the commune level); The head of an agency under the People’s Committee at the rural district, urban district, town, or provincial city, or city under centrally-governed city (hereinafter referred to collectively as the district level) shall have jurisdiction to resolve complaints for the first time regarding their own administrative decisions or administrative actions, or those for which they have direct management responsibilities. Thirdly, the 2011 Law on Complaints does not specify the jurisdiction for complaint resolution regarding administrative decisions or administrative actions of state administrative agencies. Therefore, the author recommended that the 2011 Law on Complaints should be supplemented with provisions regarding the jurisdiction for complaint resolution concerning administrative decisions or administrative actions of state administrative agencies.
Image: LLM. Truong Thi Minh Thuy passionately presented her lecture on “Regarding the Jurisdiction of Complaint Resolution under the 2011 Law on Complaints”
The third presentation was titled “Some shortcomings in the regulations on procedures for administrative complaint resolution and recommendations for improvement" by LLM. Vo Tan Dao. This presentation involved direct research and evaluation of the procedures for administrative complaint resolution. The procedures for administrative complaint resolution are a subject of considerable interest to experts, scholars, and complainants themselves. The author provided a detailed explanation of this topic. LLM. Vo Tan Dao emphasized several limitations in the Law on Complaints regarding the procedures for complaint resolution. First, the complaint law does not specify how to handle cases in which the complainant, or their legally authorized representative, repeatedly fails to participate in the dialogue or requests multiple postponements of the dialogue. In practice, there are two methods to address this issue: 1) The complaint resolver postpones and conducts the dialogue later. 2) The complaint resolver records the complainant’s absence during the dialogue and proceeds with the normal complaint resolution process. To address this limitation, the author proposed that if the absent complainant has a valid reason, the complaint resolver may temporarily suspend the complaint resolution and wait for the dialogue to take place, utilizing the temporary suspension procedure for complaint resolution. Second, the complaint law does not clearly define the process for handling cases where, during the complaint resolution process, the competent authority issues a decision to revoke or amend the subject of the complaint. Consequently, in practice, there are three methods to handle such cases: 1/ Revoking, rescinding the subject of the complaint, followed by issuing a notice of refusal to accept the complaint. 2/ Terminating the complaint resolution process with the reason that the subject of the complaint has been revoked. 3) Persuading the complainant to withdraw the complaint and subsequently issuing a decision to suspend the complaint resolution process when the complainant withdraws the complaint. LLM. Vo Tan Dao agreed with the third method, stating that it is reasonable and respects the complainant’s rights, while also adhering to the legal provisions of the Law on Complaints. Third, the complaint law lacks provisions on how to handle cases where the complainant changes, supplements, or withdraws their complaint requests during the complaint resolution process. Regarding this gap in the Law on Complaints, three methods are currently applied: 1/ Drafting a record of events and proceeding to resolve the complaint based on the complainant’s wishes. 2)/ Rejecting the changes or supplements. 3/ Instructing the complainant to withdraw the complaint, then resubmitting the complaint. LLM. Vo Tan Dao believed that specific guidelines should be provided in this regard to create a legal framework that facilitates complainants’ exercise of their rights in the most convenient manner.
Following the presentations, Ms. Phan Thi Binh Thuan, Vice Chairwoman of the Inspection Commission of the Ho Chi Minh City Party Committee, delivered her remarks. She highlighted the significance of the scientific conference organized by the Faculty of Administrative Law and State, as it provided valuable knowledge and experience for the work of resolving complaints by state agencies. Complaints and their resolution remain a pressing issue today, especially in the field of state management related to land. Ms. Thuan noted that the current complaint resolution process has not achieved the desired level of objectivity. Therefore, it may be necessary to consider explicitly allowing citizens to initiate administrative litigation when their legal rights are directly violated by administrative decisions or actions of administrative state management entities.
Image: Ms. Phan Thi Binh Thuan, Vice Chairwoman of the Inspection Commission of the Ho Chi Minh City Party Committee, providing feedback to improve the presentations.
Next, Mr. Nguyen Son Lam, Director of Nam Tri Viet Law Firm, expressed his gratitude and appreciation to the Faculty of Administrative Law and State for organizing such a large-scale conference that offered valuable knowledge for practitioners. He pointed out that the current regulations on the definition of complaint subjects are not sufficiently clear, which affects the citizens’ right to file complaints. When participating in litigation for specific cases, there are instances where complaints are not allowed, but administrative lawsuits can be initiated, and vice versa, where complaints are allowed but administrative litigation is not. This practical inconsistency has highlighted shortcomings in the legal provisions. He proposed the need to clarify the definition of complaint subjects, as thoroughly discussed in the comprehensive presentation by PhD. Le Viet Son.
Image: The conference attracted the attention of numerous experts, lecturers, and students.
Next, the fourth presentation was delivered by LLM. Nguyen Hoang Yen on behalf of the research group (LLM. Nguyen Van Tri and LLM. Nguyen Hoang Yen) titled “Improving the provisions on suspending complaint resolution under Vietnamese complaint law.” This presentation delved deep into the provisions on suspending complaint resolution, which is a relatively new topic, and the author made valuable contributions to improving these provisions in the 2011 Law on Complaints. Firstly, the author analyzed the provisions of the Complaint Law regarding suspending complaint resolution. Then, the author clarified some limitations and shortcomings in the provisions of the Complaint Law concerning suspending complaint resolution and proposed specific solutions as follows: First, The 2011 Law on Complaints lacks clear and comprehensive regulations on the grounds for suspending complaint resolution. The law does not specify the grounds for suspending complaint resolution in the following cases: when the complainant is deceased; when an organization or entity ceases to exist without inheriting their rights and obligations; After accepting a complaint, the complaint resolution authority discovers reasons for not accepting the complaint under Article 11 of the Law on Complaints; when the complainant is absent from the dialogue session without a justifiable reason. Second, Regarding the procedures for suspending complaint resolution, the current Law on Complaints does not provide specific provisions on the time limit for suspension or the form of the document suspending complaint resolution. Third, The legal consequences of suspending complaint resolution under the 2011 Law on Complaints are limited and not comprehensive. Article 11(8) of the Law on Complaints regulates the right to continue the complaint after suspension in an inadequate manner. Additionally, the law does not specify the legal consequences of suspending complaint resolution in cases where multiple complainants address the same issue. In response to these limitations, the author proposed the following improvements: First, Recognize suspending complaint resolution as an independent provision in complaint law. Second, Add grounds for suspending complaint resolution. Third, Clarify the procedures for suspending complaint resolution. Four, Specify the legal consequences of suspending complaint resolution.
Image: The students attentively listen to the speakers presenting their research.
Finally, the fifth presentation titled “The Law on Complaints by Officials, Civil Servants, and Public Employees - Current Situation and Recommendations” by LLM. Pham Thi Phuong Thao A, representing a research group (LLM. Nguyen Van Tri and LLM. Pham Thi Phuong Thao A). Unlike the presentations presented earlier, this one is characterized by its specificity, directly related to the right to complain of officials, civil servants, and public employees. The authors provided an overview of the provisions of the 2011 Law on Complaints regarding complaints by officials, civil servants, and public employees. Based on this, the authors highlighted limitations and made the following specific recommendations: First, regarding examinations, recruitment, and promotion of civil servants, as well as dismissal of civil servants, and the regulation of mentoring, there are no legal grounds to determine complainants and the procedures to be followed (if any). The authors recommend: Add complainants' criteria in the Complaint Law or in the Civil Servant Law. Second, Annual performance evaluation and classification of civil servants: Are they complainants (under the Civil Servant Law) or do they make recommendations (under Decree No. 90/2020/NĐ-CP)? Recommendation: Revise the provisions in Article 24 of Decree No. 90/2020/NĐ-CP to state that “the results of the annual performance evaluation and classification of the quality of civil servants are subjects of complaint by civil servants.” Third, Decisions to temporarily suspend work or require compensation for damages, refunds according to decisions of public career units: There are no legal grounds to determine the subject and the procedure for implementation. Recommendation: Specify the procedure for complaint. Four, Non-recognition of probation results for civil servants: Are they complainants or not? Recommendation: Add complainants as "decisions to revoke recruitment decisions for civil servants" and "decisions to terminate employment contracts for civil servants" (in cases where the requirements are not met after the probation period). Furthermore, the authors were deeply concerned about whether officials and civil servants who have retired or resigned due to disciplinary actions have the right to complain against disciplinary decisions. They also noted that the 15-day time limit for the first-time complaint against disciplinary decisions for officials and civil servants is too short and needs to be extended. The 30-day time limit for the second-time complaint against decisions to terminate civil servants (other disciplinary forms have a 10-day limit) does not have much practical significance and requires reasonable modification.
Following the presentation by LLM. Nguyen Hoang Yen, PhD. Dang Tat Dung provided some insights into the content and approach taken by the author. He also engaged in discussions and expressed appreciation for the research paper.
In the discussion session, after listening to the presenters' research papers, the members of the conference's presiding committee raised additional approaches and research ideas to create a forum for further exchange and discussion. Responding to these suggestions, the presenters, invited guests, and students present in the auditorium actively engaged in exchanging opinions and expressing their viewpoints. Among the notable guest speakers, Ms. Duong Thi Thanh Binh, an inspector from the Inspectorate of Thu Duc City, agreed with the content presented at the conference. Ms. Duong Thi Thanh Binh considered it a very valuable and practical conference. She also shared some experiences related to organizing dialogues when resolving complaints and issues regarding the suspension of complaint resolution when the complainant has passed away without inheriting their rights and obligations. She strongly endorsed and emphasized the need for the Law on Complaint to comprehensively and promptly regulate the suspension of complaint resolution to address the existing inconsistencies in complaint resolution practices, both in Thu Duc City and nationwide. Following Ms. Duong Thi Thanh Binh's speech and practical insights, PhD. Dinh Thi Cam Ha, LLM. Vo Tan Dao, and LLM. Nguyen Hoang Yen also engaged in valuable academic and practical discussions.
During the closing remarks of the conference, PhD. Dang Tat Dung summarized the conference's contents and proposed new approaches for experts, researchers, and students to continue their research in the future. On behalf of the presiding committee, PhD. Dang Tat Dung expressed sincere gratitude to the experts, researchers, and students who participated and contributed valuable insights to the conference. He especially thanked the organizers of the conference, including the professors and lecturers from the Administrative Procedure Law Department, for their meticulous preparations that led to the successful outcome of the conference.
The conference concluded at 11:30 AM on the same day, leaving participants with a wealth of valuable scientific knowledge on the topic of "Improving the Complaint Law in Vietnam today" and with a deep sense of engagement and interest.
Image: The conference attracted more than 200 delegates.
Content: Ms. Le Thi Mo - Conference secretary
Image: - Nhu Quynh - Ulaw Communications Team