Luận văn thạc sĩ Quản lý công: Improve the efficiency of responsibility inspection for state administrative agencies in the settlement of claims

Main functions of state inspection agencies in claim settlement ~ Advising heads of similar levels in claim handling; - Receiving citizens: - Carrying out state management in dealing wit

cũ UPPSALA vNU0EB

IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF RESPONSIBILITY

INSPECTION FOR STATE ADMINISTRATIVE

AGENCIES IN THE SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS

Authors

TRAN VIET HUNG

TRAN TUAN ANH TRAN THI NGUYET

Supervisor: Dr SVEN - ERIK SVARD

Local Supervisor: Dr NGUYEN KHAC HUNG

Class: MPPM INTAKE 3 - Group 6

HaNoi, January - 2012

In the process of study, research and completion of the public management

master thesis, we have received enthusiastic instruction, support and contributionfrom our distinguished lecturers of the master programme and the Centre of

International Training and Education - Economics University, Hanoi National

University and UPPSALA Univesity, Sweden

First of all, we would like to express our sincere thanks to our distinguishedlecturers of the program who have whole-heartedly instructed and transferredvaluable knowledge to us during the study time

We also would like to express our sincere thanks to Dr Sven - Erik Svard and

Dr Nguyen Khac Hung who have spent plenty of time and interest helping us during

researching and writing period.

We also would like to sincerely thank the Management Board of the EconomicsUniversity, Hanoi National University and UPPSALA University - Sweden as well aslecturers of the Centre of International Training and Education - the EconomicsUniversity, Hanoi National University who have created favorable conditions for us

to study and successfully complete the programme

We also would like to thank our collegues and friends who have supported us in

collecting reference data and comments to accomplish the thesis

Eventhough we have made lots of efforts with our all competence in completing

the thesis, there are some unavoidable shortcomings which should be receivedcontributions from you

Title of thesis: Improve the effectiveness of responsibility inspection for stateadministrative agencies in settling claims

Level: Master of Public Management

Researcher: Tran Viet Hung, Tran Tuan Anh, Tran Thi Nguyet

Supervisor: Dr Sven-Erik Svard and Dr Nguyen Khac Hung

Date of defense: 12th December 2011

Why didn`t responsibility inspection for state administrative agencies in claimsettlement in the past time gain high effectiveness?

Objective: To propose solutions and suggestions for higher effectiveness ofresponsibility inspection in settling claims

Methodology:

Research methodology:

Researchers use methods of summary and analysis; quantitative tools to analyzethe effectiveness of responsibility inspection in settling claims

Researchers use primary and secondary information.

Methods of collecting data:

1 Secondary data: from reference documents (summary reports by the

government inspectorate, magazines, research, newspapers and related websites, etc).

2 Primary data: from interviews, open questionnaire

To carry out interviews with the three subjects, the group designed a questionaire of 09 questions appropriate for each subject (commented by Dr Nguyen Khac Hung - Vietnamese supervisor - on contents and the way to conduct intervews).

To complete gathering data, the researchers started from November 04 to November

11, 2011.

Before interviews, the group met with each subject, being agreed, they

discussed about the purposes of interviews and explained every question to the interviewees The researchers made each question at a time and tried to write the answer down with fewest errors.

contents, names, addresses of the interviewees.

Results and conclusion:

Results from the research show that:

Legal documents on claim settlement are overlaped, asynchronous, lack of

enclosed instructions and do not define specific responsibilities for heads of settling

agencies

There is no document on the procedure of a responsibility inspection and itsinstructions therefore, each case is settled in a different way, causing shortcomingsand mistakes

Inspection officers do not pay attention to supervising and examining the

enforcement of decisions, conclusions and proposals after inspected

Inspection officers are profession and skill limited

Responsibility inspection in settling claims is not regularly conducted Contents

of inspection lack of focal points and not selected from complicated cases

Profession related instructions and support are not cocentrated

There is no santion strict enough for violation

Conclusions are common, do not show thorough comments and evaluation, donot demonstrate causes of shortcomings and mistakes, do not propose treatment forviolations

Research results aim at improving the effectiveness of responsibility inspection

in settling claims It is required that state inspectorate should successfully deal with the above issues.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

Limitations of the title:

The thesis contains certain limitations as the researchers only focus on one field

of inspection at the state inspectorate, due to limited resources including fund, timeand human, which prevents them from broadening research subjects and scope inorder for an overall evaluation on responsibilty inspection

Because of typical features of the state inspectorate, the group could not haveaccess to detailed data of several specific inspected cases Therefore, the researchers

(from interviews with 12 heads, dealers and claimants) From the data, the groupanalyzed and evaluated the situation of responsibility inspection in the past time andsuggested some solutions to enhance the effectiveness of responsibility inspection.

The thesis used methods of summary, analysis, qualitative to analyze theeffectiveness of responsibility inspection in claim settlement

Suggestion for future research:

The thesis is at the place of master degree, therefore, the researchers did nothave conditions to thoroughly and widely research other fields of inspection, whichmakes the contents unprofound and not demonstrating all the issues of inspection.Afterwards, the group shall continue to further research if given favorable conditions

to develop it into specific features of responsibility inspection such as (i) surveying;(ii) making plans: (iii) collecting data and documents; (iv) examining and verifyingdata and documents; (v) reporting results: (vi) concluding to upgrade the thesis to

doctorate.

Contribution of the thesis:

The thesis is one of few research conducted in the field of responsibilityinspection in settling claims Its results help the state inspectorate acknowledge thesituation of responsibility inspection in settling claims Some solutions are alsosuggested for higher effectiveness of responsibility inspection in upcoming claimsettlement by the government inspectorate

Key words:

Responsibility inspection in upcoming claim settlement

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ABBREVIATIONS

INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1 THEORETICAL BASIS AND EXPERIENCE OF SOME

COUNTRIES IN THE SETTLEMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS 12

1 State inspection system of Vietnam 12

2 Definition and function 122.1 Definition 122.2 Function 14

14 15 16

3 Development history of law on complaints in Vietnam

4 State management in settlement of administrative complaints

5 Professional procedure

5.1 Procedure of claim settlement 165.2 Order and procedures of responsibility inspection in settling complaints 175.2.1 Form of responsibility inspection in settling complaints 175.2.2 Contents of responsibility inspection in settling complaints = 17

5.2.3 Procedures of responsibility inspection in claim settlement (detailed in

Appendix 2

2.1 Claimants

2.2 Direct dealers of claims

2.3 Heads of inspection agencies

3 General comment on the situation of responsibility inspection

3.1 Regarding law

3.2 Implementation of responsibility inspection

CONCLUSION - CHAPTER 2

Chapter 3 RECOMMENDATIONS AND SOLUTIONS TO IMPROVE

EFFICIENCY OF RESPONSIBILITY INSPECTION OF THE STATEADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN RESOLVING COMPLAINTS 38

1 Some measures to improve efficiency of responsibility inspection applied for

administrative agencies in settlement of claims

1.1 Solutions for inspection sector

1.1.1 Raising awareness of responsibility inspection

1.1.2 Strengthening the leadership of local authorities

1.1 3 Planning responsibility inspection

1.1.4 Completing statutory regulations on inspection in general and that ofresponsibilities in particular

1.1.5 Choosing the appropriate inspection form and content

1.1.6 Enhancing the training and refreshing, professional training, review and

experiences learning to raise awareness competence, professional qualifications for

responsibility inspection staff

1.1.7 Preparing inspection conclusion

1.1.8 Supervising and inspecting the implementation of post inspection conclusions

43 43 43

and recommendations

1.1.9 Applicating information technology.

1.2 For citizen:

2 Recommendations to improve the efficiency of the inspection for state

administrative agencies in the settlement of claims 2 44

CONCLUSION 46 REFERENCES - 49

APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Order and procedures for conducting a responsibility inspection

Appendix 2 Questionaire (complainant: person directly dealing with complaints:

- 63

head of inspection entity)

Right of claims is one of fundamental rights of citizens, good resolution ofclaims is a manifestation of a democratic and legitimate state of the people, by thepeople and for the people of the State of Vietnam Therefore, the settlement of claims

has always been concerned and paid attention by the State.

Resolving complaints effectively is one of the important measures to protect thelegitimate rights and benefits of citizens who are infringed upon from the unlawfulacts of state agencies and their officials to ensure the service for the people of thestate mechanism

In fact, complaints are inextricably linked and settling complaints have alwaysbeen regarded as one of the important work in the operation of state agencies For

years we have frequently innovated the mechanism of resolving complaints to further

improve the efficiency of this work The state agencies, especially the state

inspection agencies of all levels and sectors, have made efforts in receiving and settling complaints but the effectiveness of settlement have not been high and

complaints keep increasing and become more and more complex

Many measures have been suggested to remedy this situation, eventually afterbeing re-evaluated, to improve the efficiency of responsibility inspection in claims

handling is regarded as the best, comprehensive and highly effective measure.

Research question: Why has responsibility inspection in claim settlement not resulted in high effectiveness?

Research objective: To propose measures and recommendations in order to

improve the effectiveness of responsibility inspection in claim settlement

Research subject: During inspection, inspection agencies have to work on a number of fields However, due to limit of the thesis, the group focuses on a field

which is responsibility inspection in claim settlement

Research location: Government inspection agency

Research methodology: The following methodologies have been used in thethesis:

to analyze the effectiveness of responsibility inspection in claim settlement.

The thesis has also used primary and secondary information.

Method of data collection

Reference documents (summary reports by the government inspectorate,magazines, research, newspapers and related websites, etc.)

Interviews, questionnaire (designed with open questions)

The thesis includes three chapter:

Chapter 1: Theoretical base and experience from some nations in settling

administrative claims.

Chapter 2: The situation of responsibility inspection for state administrative

agencies in claim settlement in Vietnam.

Chapter 3: Solutions and suggestions to improve the effectiveness ofresponsibility inspection for state agencies in claim settlement

Chapter 1THEORETICAL BASIS AND EXPERIENCE OF SOME COUNTRIES

IN THE SETTLEMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS

1 State inspection system of Vietnam '

1.1 State inspection agency includes:

- Inspection agencies of departments

- Inspection agencies of districts, wards, towns, provincial cities (generally

called communal agency)

1.2 Organizations assigned to function specialized inspection

To be established in some general bureaus, ministry bureaus, branch bureaus ofdepartments

1.3 Main functions of state inspection agencies in claim settlement

~ Advising heads of similar levels in claim handling;

- Receiving citizens:

- Carrying out state management in dealing with administrative claims:

- Inspecting and examining responsibilities of implementing laws on claims

2 Definition and function

2.1 Definition

Administrative complaints are the situation where citizens, agencies,organizations, officials, civil servants propose agencies, organizations or authoritiesre-consider administrative decisions, administrative acts or disciplinary decisions forofficials and civil servants when they have evidence showing that the administrative

` Regulated in Article 4 and 5 of Inspection Law in 2010.

legitimate benefit

Inspecting responsibilities in implementing the law on complaints means the act

carried out by the state management agencies in the order and procedures prescribed

by the law to review assess conclude strong points and weak points andresponsibilities of agencies, organizations, units and their heads in implementing law

on inspection, complaints to handle according to authority or propose measures to handle and overcome in order to improve the efficiency of settling complaints.

The subject of administrative complaints is Vietnamese citizens, foreigners,

state agencies and organizations that have legal rights and benefits directly affected

by administrative decisions or acts

The object of administrative claims*: Are administrative decisions, acts and

disciplinary decisions for officials

Administrative decisions are a written decision by a state administrative agency

or by an authority of the state administrative agency applied once to one or several

specific subjects over a specific issue in administrative management activities”.*

Administrative acts are acts of state administrative agencies, of authorized

persons in state administrative agencies to perform or not to perform their tasks and

public duties as prescribed by law”.

Disciplinary decisions are written decisions by heads of agencies andorganizations to apply one of the disciplinary forms against officials and civil

servants under their management in accordance with the law on officials and

employees”.”

* Clause 1 of Article 2 of Law on claims in 1998 (amended and supplemented in 2004, 2005); Clause | of

Article 3 of Draft Law on claims in 2010.

* Clause 1 of Article 2 of Law on Complaints issued in 1998 (amended and supplemented in 2004, 2005);

Clause 8, 9, 10 of Article 3 of Draft Law on claims in 2010.

* Clause 10 of Article 2 of Law on Complaints in 1998; Clause 8 of Article 3 Draft Law on Complaints in

field of state management, evaluate the appropriateness of issued policies and laws to

execute amendments and additions in time

Settling administrative claims means controlling, verifying and concluding on

legality and legitimacy of administrative decisions acts claimed under the

jurisdiction of state administrative agencies in order to give measures pursuant to the

law protecting the rights and legitimate benefits of citizens, agencies, organizations

and public benefits of the state and society

2.2.2 The role of responsibility inspection for handling complaints

Inspecting responsibilities of state administrative agencies in settlement ofclaims aims at assessing the compliance status of the legal provisions of theauthorized agencies or organizations in settlement of claims, thereby detectingshortcomings and difficulties in implementing policies and laws in order to timelysteer or propose amendments or additions improving these policies and laws

Responsibility inspection for settlement of claims aims at contributing toimprove the efficiency of claims settlement of authorities, units, organizations

3 Development history of law on complaints in Vietnam

The development process of Vietnam law on administrative claims is attached

to issuance and implementation of important documents on claim handling by the

State The development process of the law on administrative claims is divided into

supplemented in 2004 2005).

4 State management in settlement of administrative complaints

Responsibility inspection for the implementation of legal provisions oninspection, complaints is stipulated as a principle in Inspection Law Law on

Complaints and in some Governmental Decree.’

Settlement of complaints is a task of the state mechanism, but mainly carried

out by state administrative agencies.* State management function on complaints is of

the Government and agencies in the state administrative system Management

contents on complaints prescribed in claim law includes the following fundamental

issues”:

- To issue legal documents on claims and claim settlement

- To propagandize, guide and organize the implementation of the provisions oncomplaints

- To organize, direct, inspect and supervise the implementation of the law on

complaints and the settlement of complaints.

- To train and retrain cadres and civil servants in charge of settling complaints

and receiving citizens.

- To review the situation of and settlement of complaints

- To internationally cooperate in settling complaints

- To review experiences in settling claims

Pursuant to provisions of current law on complains, authority andresponsibilities of inspection agencies in handling complaints are presented on thefollowing basis:

- Inspector General is authorized to:

+ Settle complaints that have first been handled by heads of governmentalagencies, but complaints still exist;

7 Article 5; 15; 18; 21; 24; 27 of Inspection Law in 2010; Article 54; 58 of Decreel36/2006; Circular No

475/2009 between the Government Inspectorate and the Ministry of Interior Affairs.

* Law on Complaints in 1998 (amended and supplemented in 2004, 2005); Draft Law on claims in 2010

* Article 80 of Law on Complaints in 1998 (amended and supplemented in 2004, 2005); Article 65 of Draft

Law on claims in 2010.

+ Assist the Prime Minister to monitor, inspect and urge ministries, level agencies different level People’s Committees in receiving citizens and settlingcomplaints and executing effective decisions on complaints;

ministerial-In case of detecting legal violations causing damages to benefits of the State.rights and lawful benefits of citizens, agencies and organizations, it is possible topropose to the Prime Minister or authorized persons to apply necessary measures tostop violations and consider liabilities and treatment for violators

- Chief Inspector of all levels and sectors shall have to verify, conclude andrecommend to resolve complaints under the jurisdiction of heads of management atthe same level Therefore at present basically inspection agency no longer is a level

to settle complaints (except the Inspector General has jurisdiction over complaintsthat have been first settled heads of governmental agencies, but complaints exist).Inspection agencies are largely in charge of verifying, concluding and recommending

to resolve complaints under the jurisdiction of heads of the same level managementand inspecting, examining the implementation of the law on complaints (one of theimportant contents in state management over the settlement of complaints) In otherwords, inspection agencies are advisory bodies to heads of administrative agencies at

all levels in the settlement of claims.

5 Professional procedure

5.1 Procedure of claim settlement

Under the provisions of the legislation on complaints, complaint resolution

process has the basic steps!”:

- Accepting complaint letters;

- Considering complaints;

- Issuing decisions on settlement of complaints.

Currently there have no circular regulating procedure of claim handlinginstructing order, procedures and contents of claim settlement including preparation,operation and completion of claim settlement Therefore, claim handling at present isconducted under general regulations of Law on claimss

'® Law on Complaints in 1998 (amended and supplemented in 2004, 2005); Draft Law on claims in 2010.

5.2 Order and procedures of responsibility inspection in settling complaints

Responsibility inspection in settling claims will contribute to improving the

management responsibilities of branches and levels and capture the status of

complaints and the settlement results in bodies and units During inspection time, it isnecessary to determine procedures and contents of inspection and to follow theimplementation process for fruitful results

5.2.1 Form of responsibility inspection in settling complaints

Based on the factual situation and the requested purposes of state management,responsibility inspection in settling complaints shall be conducted in one of the threefollowing forms:

- Comprehensive inspection shall be conducted in order to serve thecomprehensive assessment of settlement of complaints in a branch, a local, an

agency or a unit (from organizing to receive citizens, receiving and handling

complaints, resolving complaints to the regime of inspection by leaders, etc.);

- Thematic inspection shall be conducted to promptly rectify a certain stage of

work, i.e stage of receiving citizens or receiving and handling complaints, resolving

complaints;

- Sudden inspection shall be conducted to solve unexpected cases in a certain

locality, branch, agency or unit (for example, a complaint of crowded people affects

local security)

5.2.2 Contents of responsibility inspection in settling complaints

Responsibility inspection in settling claims includes the following issues:

- Inspecting responsibilities in receiving citizens: receiving citizens is one of themost important parts of management, the beginning stage of settling complaints.Contents of responsibility inspection on receiving citizens should focus on the

arrangement of places to communicate with citizens; conditions and facilities serving

the process, rules for places to communicate with citizens; instruction receivingplaces; periodical receipts with citizens of leaders of the agencies and the factual

irnplementation schedules;

- Inspecting responsibilities of receiving and handling complaints: This contentincludes receiving researching, classifying according to authority, organizationalmanagement, tracking complains letter:

- Inspecting responsibilities of considering and settling complaints under the

jurisdiction: This content includes the implementation of steps to settle complaints.the implementation of procedures required by law, to ensuring the settling time theimplementation of operational measures such as dialogue and draft conclusion,consulting meeting and announcement, arranging and recording documentation andtesting, monitoring and urging the implementation of the effective decisions:

- Inspecting responsibilities of state management over complaints: This contentincludes issuing written instruction to guide, supervise and execute complaints:inspecting responsibilities of heads of institutions; organizing propaganda andeducation on claim law: training and upgrading officials to communicate withcitizens and settle complaints: summarizing and reporting on situation of settlingcomplaints as required by higher levels;

- In addition, it is necessary to examine and evaluate summaries andpreliminary reports to learn from working with citizens and settling complaints

5.2.3 Procedures of responsibility inspection in claim settlement (detailed in Appendix 1)

The procedure of responsibility inspection currently does not exist, therefore, it

is applied according to that of an inspection’.

Step 1: Preparation Step 2: Implementation Step 3: Completion

~ Surveying situation ~ Declaring inspection ~ Drawing reports on

of to be-inspected decisions; results;

units; - Collecting information, ~ Building conclusion;

- Making decisions documents related to ~ Supervising, checking

and planning | —>}| inspection contents; }—»| execution of conclusion;

inspection work; - Examining and ~ Summarizing activities

- Building proposals verifying information and of the inspectorate;

aiming at inspected documents; ~ Handing over

subjects - Reporting progress of documents.

implementation;

~ Completing inspection work

"" Circular No 02/2010/TT-TTCP dated 03/02/2010 by the government inspectorate regulating procedure of an

imspection.

6 Experience on claim settlement from some countries

Law of several countries over the world consists of regulations on different

forms of claims, authority of claim settlement and its procedure to assure of citizens”rights Most of countries determine authority of claim handling belongs to stateadministrative agencies Some countries have established administrative ruling

agencies, bringing settlement work into order, however, claim settlement under

administrative levels remains respectful

Different perspectives on administrative judgement and different historicalfactors socio-economic conditions among countries bring about specific solutions,

which leads to the variety of organization, scope and authority of ruling agencies.

Experiences on claim settlement from different countries’?

Apart from authority of claim handling of state administrative agencies, some

countries follow the French form such as Turkey, Egypt, Belgium, Italia, Greece)where administrative courts have independent role but close relationship with stateadministration by functioning the courts to legally consult especially at central levels

Some other countries set up a mechanism of ruling agencies to deal with

administrative issues such as Germany, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Portugal, Mexico).Some choose the neutral measure which means administrative courts are notestablished in an independent system but as administratively specialized ones of thecourt system such as China, Indonesia, Congo, Nigeria, Tongo, Cote d’lvoire)

Regarding claim settlement, France applies a special principle in which neutral

agencies are assigned an independent role, having the right to question concerned agencies and advise them in handling issues In case, advices have been sent but

these agencies do not execute, the neutral agencies are allowed to make public theadvices Annual reports from the neutral agencies are sent to the president andparliements and announced in state newspapers In order to make decisions by courtsenforced, France regulates their implicit validity

While considering decisions by courts, most countries determine that courtsfocus on specific administrative claims However, laws of many other countries

allow their courts to indirectly examine legality of legal documents during settlement

© Dr Le Tien Hag (2011), Administrative claims and denunciation ~ Situation and Solutions

time Many countries allow their citizens to complain about legal documents if theydiscover that the documents go against with that of higher levels or the constitution.

In general different laws of different countries regulate some disputes lie inadministrative area but is not of authority of administrative courts for reasons related

to state benefits, national independence and state mechanism which consist ofdocuments on military security, diplomatic policies, interior activities of stateagencies

A specific frame of claim settlement all over the world is the Assembly

Inspectorate in Sweden".

The assembly inspectorate is regarded as the most important contribution ofSweden to the development of international law on constitution The Swedishassembly inspectorate started to operate in 1810 and is used to be the uniqueorganization in the world in 100 years The second organization was established inFinland in 1919 and then in Denmark during 1950s According to tradition of theNorthern European country, the assembly regards the assembly inspectorate asofficials on behalf of the assembly to supervise legal agencies The assemblyinspectorate reports its discoveries to the assembly - the highest supervisor of a

democratic system.

The main purpose of the Swedish assembly inspectorate’s activities is to protectprinciples of the jurisdiction state and citizens’ rights and freedom stated in Swedishconstitution and law Assembly inspectorate supervises all state agencies and localauthority, officials, public individuals, but not ministers, senators or members oflocal people`s committees

Inspectors have the right to get access to all official documents, evenconfidential ones and require all officials to supply any information and help duringinspecting time as well as in other field Inspectors have the right to require help frompublic prosecutors Inspectors have the right to prosecute violated staff, to proposepunishment such as pay cut, temporary work off or lay off, to warn or criticizeirresponsible officials, to comment on specific issues in order to perfect the

'° This part is mainly based on articles of Marianne von der Esch, Swedish assembly inspector, 2005.

admendment directly to the ministry of internal affairs or Riksdag.

However, claim settlement is exactly the most important authority given to theSwedish assembly inspectorate Attentively inspectorate usually do not considerabout awaiting issues at either courts or any administrative levels or of possibleclaims All courts, administrative levels or officials have to provide inspectorate withinformation and reports required including confidential documents, which meanssecrete police and armed force also have to transfer these documents to them ifrequired Especially, anybody including Swedish or expats shall have the right toclaim providing that “they have evidence for being unfairly treated by publicagencies.” Philosophy for this unusual regulation is that all citizens need to becreated favorable conditions to believe that they know where to complain aboutpublic decisions and public agencies should be aware that all their acts aresupervissed by citizens

Being given that important function, regarding inspectorate’s role, according toSwedish specialists, it is difficult to imagine the Swedish constitution without itsassembly inspectorate It act as a stable factor in Swedish society by making citizens

to trust Authorized levels Its public evaluation on an official plays a role of a publicsentence Therefore, citizens understand that administrative violations shall surely bepunished Pressure is increased with support from the press

Inspectorate considerably supports authority by supplying legal suggestions onconstitutional and administrative procedures In fact, authorities consider officialdeclarations from inspectorate as a legal conclusion, however, it is not actually One

of the most essential functions of the assembly inspectorate is to participate indeveloping administrative law and procedures in Sweden It also fosters thesettlement of claims between citizens and authority by contacting directly authorized

agencies.

Factually, only 12-14% of claims sent to the Swedish inspectorate is concludedviolated However, the number does not mean that inspectorate is useless to themajority of claimants On the contrary, it shows that mostly citizens can believe inauthority after being examined by the assembly inspectorate Furthermore, when

citizens send claims to the assembly inspectorate and it works objectively, authority

should keep its credits

In general experience from Sweden proves that the assembly inspectorate plays

an important position in protecting individuals’ right Eventhough it never can

replace official legal agencies such as court or prosecutor, it is an integral supplement

to these agencies It is not an accidental remark from a researcher that “Swedish

assembly inspectorate draws a great attention all over the world as a tool to control

red tape administrative mechanism,” protecting citizens’ rights from powerabusement

After analyzing experiences from a number of countries on claim settlement,especially after analyzing the typical Swedish mechanism, Vietnam established aruling agency in charge of claim handling to protect citizens’ rights

To clear up perspectives on responsibility inspection and its importance indeaing with claims in order to evaluate the situation of implementing regulations byauthorities and discover shortcomings to timely steer or propose for amendment,add:tions and completion.

To research and draw experiences from some countries regarding positions,roles and authority of agencies-in-charge and forms of settlement

Theoreticle base of administrative claims and settlement as well asresponsibility inspection is the premis for research, analysis, evaluation of claimsettement and responsibility inspection to accomplish law on claims and enhanceefficiency of settlement

Chapter 2SITUATION OF RESPONSIBILITY INSPECTION FORSTATE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN CLAIM SETTLEMENT IN

VIETNAM

(Researchers have used secondary documents based on reports from the

goverment inspectorate and primary ones from interviews with leaders ofinspectorate, officials in charge of settling claims and claimants to collect data Fromthere, researchers have summarize analyze and evaluate the situation ofresponsibility inspection for state agencies in handling claims the past time.)

1 Overview on the situation of responsibility inspection based on secondary

documents

1.1 Achievements

According to the law, state inspection organizations are responsible for

supervising and inspecting heads of different levels and sectors in implementing law

om claims Through these actions, inspection organizations are able to acknowledgethe implementation of legal regulations in working with the people, resolving claims,executing decisions on claims, timely detecting faults and drawbacks, therefore,carrying out positive and effective solutions, contributing to upgrading awarenessand effeciency of settling work of all levels and sectors

a) Receiving citizens

Recent results of working with the people show that claims have taken place in

a complicated trend In 2006 the headquarter of receiving the people of the Party andthe State in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City has worked with 24.199 rounds of people(increasing 31% compared to 2005) Of which 554 rounds include many people(increasing 31,9% compared to 2005) 49.846/50.807 letters have been replied(increasing 9,8% compared to 2005), with the portion of 13.510 claims, 788denunciations, 1.554 proposals and 1.132 suggestions and 31.342 same letters (equal

to 62,88%)'* In 2007 the headquarter worked with 24.833 rounds (544 crowded

rounds), ministries and sectors worked with 20.593 rounds (125 crowded), local ˆ* Extracted from working report in 2006 by the government inspectorate.

acministratives 288.415 rounds (896 crowded) In the past year state administrativesreceived 216.515 claims and denunciation Of which the government inspectoratereceived 58.676 letters, ministriess and sectors 33.180, locals 124.459 Classifyingletters shows 79.258 claims (increasing 21.24% compared to 2006) and 9.860

denunciations (decreasing 16.4% compared to 2006)'.

b) Inspection work on specific cases and responsibilities of implementation

of claim and denunciation law:

In 2006 the government inspectorate considered and verified 83 complicatedclaims and denunciation assigned by the Prime Minister (apart from supervising andcooperating to find the solutions to claims and denunciation with the Provincial andCentral People’s Committees, ministries and sectors) In 2007 the governmentinspectorate examined and verified 93 complicated, crowded and long lasting claimsand denunciation pointed by the Prime Minister (concluded and reported to the Prime

Minister 82 cases making up to 88,17%)'° Within the first six months of 2007,

results of examining implementation of decisions to claims showed that of 2006

issued decisions there are only 1.171 implemented, 835 unimplemented '”.

According to reports from 62/63 provinces and central cities, 24/26 ministries

and sectors, from 2005 to 06/30/2009'%, state administrative bodies at local and

central levels received 628.305 claim letters with 442.433 cases, 316.626 are injurisdictional limits, solved 246.404 making up to 93,6%, central ministries andsectors received 107.719 claim letters, 53,401 in jurisdictional limits, 49,416 solvedequal to 92,53%

In accordance with results of 235.595 solved cases from 62 provinces and citiesand 24 ministries and sectors by reports, the number of claims is exactly 42.450(equal to 18.02%) The number of right and wrong is 63.407 (equal to 26.91%), thewrong is 129.738 (equal to 55.07%)

'S Extracted from working report in 2007 by the government inspectorate

'© Working report in 2006 by the government inspectorate

" Working report on inspection during the first six months of 2007 by the government inspectorate

'® According to report No, 2280/BC-TTCP dated 08-04-2010 by the government inspectorate from 2005 to

6/2009 (62/63 of central provinces and cities, 24/26 ministers and sectors have received more than 628.305

claims per 422.433 cases in total, reaching 93,42% By settling claims, state agencies propose to retrieve 243.093,62 dongs; 1.530,51 ha of land: explain for 5.552 people; suggest disciplines for 1.790 subjects;

transfer to inspection agencies 69 cases with 163 subjects).

In order to create a positive change in settling claims, inspection agenciesshould focus on examining responsibilities of all levels and sectors not taking over

or encroach on responsibilities

1.2 Limitations and causes

1.2.1 Limitations

a) Limitations in state management”

The situation of administrative claims recently has occured in a complicatedtrend tended to cross to central levels Administrative claims take place in most areasdue to the process of industrialization urbanization and modernization,implementation of projects of urban areas, indusrial zones, entertainment places, landuse management and policies Therefore, it is necessary for state administrativeorganizations to strictly and responsibly participate to settle these cases effectively

Despite being called to attention, in fact in many places, heads of stateorganizations have not been fully aware of their responsibilities in settling claims orfaced with many embarrassments if any in taking their responsibilities and authority,which causes low efficiency Not mentioning some locals hire an inspection body inlump sum whose authority is still limited

The government inspectorate carried out some inspection of responsibilities andinitially yeilded achievements However, they realized that this work has not beenconsidered as essential In some places sometimes heads of management andinspection bodies still focused on investigating faults rather than creating rules foreffective operation of the system within its rights and responsibilities, which willhelp minimize faults right at the beginning On the other hand, the law does notconsist specific regulations on inspection of responsibilities

Punishment to violation is not strict enough to produce warnings

Supervision by the higher levels to the lower ones has not been regularly carriedout, hesitance still exists

b) Limitations in implementing inspection procedure

'® According to report No 2280/BC-TTCP dated 08/04/2010 by the government inspectorate reviewing the

implementation of claim and denunciation law from 2005 to 6/2009.

Some shortcomings in responsibility inspection work in address ing claims recently:

Preparation (Step 1): Regulations on order have not been applied when carryingout inspection of responsibilities Specifically, detailed plans with clear objectives,requirements contents, location, subjects time, methods have not been established,

which has caused rough implementation with low efficiency.

Officials of inspection delegations have not met requirements, limited incompetence qualification, not well-acknowledged procedures and policies due tounfinished, asynchronous, unstable, unrealistic compared to national andinternational frustrations as well as lacked of experiences they have usually been

confused, failed to discover the matters and propose solutions.

Implementation (Step 2): The delegations have not successfully executeddemands of inspection work Many of them only listened to reports from local units

as well as their results, did not carefully investigate given documents, therefore,could not discover drawbacks especially in complicated cases Consequently, theycould not give out conclusions or propose feasible solutions or address difficulties.That is the reason why annual inspection could not solve long lasting cases andviolation in settling claims still happened

Completion (Step 3): Many conclusions of inspection have been rough, have

not fully addressed situations and their reasons in the units, have not exactly

described the results, not illustrated reasons of remainings, drawbacks,responsibilities of related groups and individuals, not proposed solutions to theseproblems Supervision on implementation of inspection conclusions has not beenclose and drastic

1.2.2 Reasons of limitations”

a) Objective reasons

Regulations on inspection of responsibility in claim settlement have not been

completed to be a basis for implementation.”! This leads to different awarenesses of

*° According to the report No 2280/BC-TTCP dated 08/04/2010 by the government inspectorate reviewing the

implementation of claim and denunciation law from 2005 to 6/2009.

*! Law on claims and denunciation in 1998 (amended and added in 2004, 2005) and instruction documents

regulate responsibilities of the state, sectors and ministries in inspecting implementation of law on claims but without detailed instruction for authorized state bodies to conduct.

the issue from bodies, different implementation at different places absence ofsummaries, estimation, experience learning for instructions on the issue.

Regulations have not identified responsibilities of inspection and examiniation,making confused written terms between inspection and examiniation or examiniationonly Therefore, it is difficult to verify implementation instruction documentation

Unsound regulations are one of important reasons affecting implementation ofinspection Besides in some places instructions have been still undrastic, unthorough,lacked of supervision causing low efficiency In some cases, instructions fromleaders were not clear or synchronous which made the followers confused In othercases followers did not strictly apply leaders’ guidelines basically influencingefficiency of inspection as well as settlement

Settling policies are presently sophisticated regarding authority and order,procedures, even troubling the people deadlines do not match reality which isdifficult to implement

b) Subjective reasons

Inspection and examination of responsibility of claim law implementation havenot been carried out strictly Moreover, violations have not been treated sternly,therefore, inspection was merely preventive (experience learning, supervising,reorganizing), not deterent (strictly tackling)

Contents of law popularization are rough in many places, propaganda forms areuninteresting Besides, most of locals meet difficulties in gathering aids fororganization This means hamlets and wards who get propagenda are limited andefficiency is low

Contents of training programmes are slowly improved, the number of sessions

is few and inadvanced, trainers do not meet the real demands The total number of

inspection officials in 2008 is 19126; in 2009, 22068; in 2010, 26810, of which a

large number (thousands) of inspectors have not been trained professionally due toregular movements and work changes Officials for general claims are lack andincompetent, officials of working with the people in many bodies are still lack.Policies and working conditions for officials working with the people and assistants

* Resource: Bureau of Management ~ The government inspectorate

to authorized persons are not given much attention, not supporting the officials to bemore responsible and to attentively work.

Cooperation among levels, sectors and locals in the process of settling claimshave not been close Solutions to complicated cases from different related bodies aredifferent but unfinished without careful discussion

Administrative principles in settling claims are not strict For many cases, lower

levels did not or promptly execute decisions from higher levels Supervision from

higher levels to lower ones does not take place regularly

Awareness of law obedience as well as understanding of law of a part of thepeople are still low For example, in some cases people make excessive demands ordid not understand their rights and obligations as well as the procedures, they sentletters to many levels Especially, some of them did not accept reasonable solusions.tried to prolong the process, even made negative reactions towards persons-in-charge

or pushed others to cause troubles worsening the situations Some people did notintend to bring the cases to the court but did not respect decisions from heads ofadministrative bodies

Settlement work ranges in a wide and complicated scope, unfinished cases due

to changed policies and law and unclear documentaion and evidence, missing andunupdated files, considerably arising cases are massive pressure and challenges forcurrent state administrative bodies, especially at provincial and central levels

Law enforcement and inspection are complicated work related to the people’sassets and reputation making cases difficult to be tackled The process of inspectionrequires documents to be kept in secret, which means provision and demonstration tothe people are necessarily limited, therefore, sometimes the people involved lack ofbelief in the given results

2 Overview on the situation of responsibility inspection based on primary

documents (by interviewing 12 people including claimants, dealers, leaders) See

questionaire in Appendix 2

To carry out interviews with the three subjects, the researchers have designed aquestionaire including 9 questions appropriate fo each attempted subject (it has beencommented by Dr Nguyen Khac Hung - the Vietnamese lecturer on contents and the

way to conduct interviews) In order to complete gathering data, the researchersstarted to interview from November 04 to November 11, 2011.

Before interviewing, the group met with each subject and with their agreement,they discussed about the purposes of the interview and questions The group gave outeach question at a time and tried to take notes the answers with minimized errors

However due to privacy, the reseachers do not make detailed description oncontents, names and addresses of interviees

Some data collected from interviews:

2.1 Claimants

a) Determining claimed issues

Claimants come to inspection agencies to gain their rights, mainly on land use,

compensation, overuse, etc.

Claimants come to inspection agencies largely for land related issues (such asland use, compensation from site clearance)

b) Evaluating the way dealers receive and address claims

Inspectors make instructions on settlement procedures which is, however, notenthusiastic and specific, moreover, do not propose reasonable solutions and strictactions to completely end the issues, pressing citizens

Opinions show that “inspectors do not really accomplish their assignedfunctions as well as are not highly responsible, causing many mistakes and

negative avoid when discovering that subjects are officials under their

e) Evaluating dealers’ behaviour, competence and attitude

Claimants express that some shortcomings would lead to considerable affects.Some say some officers’ competence is limited (*J doubt that receiving officers arenot highly competent”) and some do not handle issues with their entireresponsibilities (“wnenthusiastic instructions, avoiding responsibilities”)

f) Evaluating current regulations of the law

Interviewees have avoided this question, showing that inadequacy may exist insome current regualations

g) Regular advantages and disadvantages when claiming

Some express that responsible agencies usually avoid their responsibilities bypassing them from higher to lower levels and handle issues without enthusiasm

Heads’ responsibilities are not clearly stated, leading to avoidance which causesprolonged and increasingly complicated claims as they are not settled right atgrassroot levels

State agencies do not fully and appropriately perform their functions and duties.h) Demonstaring improvement solutions for better effective claims

Higher state management organizations should regularly supervise lower levelsduring claim settlement

They should be strict and fair when settling claims, applying regulations

properly.

Sanctions of settlement should be built for officers assigned to address issuesbut improperly enforcing regulations on functions, responsibilities and duties.Inspection agencies should establish supervising units for distributed cases

2.2 Direct dealers of claims

a) Sharing experience in claim settlement

Most of interviewees say that “it is necessary to follow procedures of claimsettlement as well as thoroughly examine letters to acknowledge claimants’requirements, carefully understand claim contents and related regulations” in order

to demonstrate proper and legal solutions

Responsibilities should be accurately performed when dealing with claims

Evidence and basis from claimants should be screened and compared toregulations to determine right or wrong claims in order to propose solutions.

b) Difficulties when settling claims

Some express that “/egal system and asynchronous policy” \ead to conflictsamong regulations and laws Besides, mechanism and policies are not practical andchangeable: regulations on claims and settlement are different and ununiformedamong laws

Evidence can not be collected because “evidence is lost, witnesses supplycontradict information and evidence.” This is an extreme difficulty for officers tomake precise decisions

Claimants” knowledge on law is considerably limited, causing non-evidentialclaims Facilities at some places are lack and do not meet requirements fromprofession implementation Furthermore, officers’ qualification and competence arelimited, awareness is not uniform, more or less influencing effectiveness of claimsettlement

c) Evaluating legal regulations on claim settlement

Many responses show that “the current legal system is not completed,asynchronous and improper, overlap and conflicts exist.”

d) Proposing issues necessary to be improved for higher effectiveness of claimsettlement

State administrative agencies of all levels should innovate their ways ofoperation, upgrade competence and morality of officers-in-charge

Heads should concentrate on profession and skill training for receiving andsettling officers

Legal system and policies should be accomplished to avoid weakness whensettling Additionally, propaganda and education on law in general and law on claims

in particular for community should be enhanced

Representative role of lawyers during settlement should be highly appreciated.e) Difficulties in the process of receiving citizens

Due to incompleted and changeable legal system (“regulations are notpractical), seize of amended and added information by inspection officers andcitizens is not advantageous and settlement faces with difficulties.

Some officers’ competence is limited, ununiform and avoiding performanceshows “low responsibility

Citizens’ awareness of law is limited (“in some cases, citizens know that theirclaims are wrong but still insist on their benefits.)

f) Difficulties in receiving citizens

It is difficult to communicate with claimants who pretend to be “fool and deaf”.2.3 Heads of inspection agencies

a) Sharing experience in settling claims

Settlement should “reach appropriateness, create mutual consent betweendealers and claimants.” Dealers should “use flexible but proper measures, executepolicies based on practical foundation.”

When settling claims, officers should “carefully examine and thoroughly listen

to collect information from different directions, verify claim contents”, proposingsuitable solutions

b) Sharing experience in responsibility inspection for state agencies in claim

settlement

“Responsibility inspection should be regularly conducted” to discover mistakesand shortcomings in settling claims and remind heads of agencies of perform theirresponsibilities properly

Heads of agencies should receive appropriate treatment when wrongly performtheir duties

c) Difficulties in responsibility inspection

Perspectives on settlement are “partly different and ununiform” among sectors,levels and individuals

Majority of opinions shows that regular difficulty is “incompleted legal system,impractical asynchronous and unfeasible policies”, causing confusion during

settlement process.

d) Commenting on regulations on responsibility inspection in settling claims

Law on responsibility inspection is insufficient lack of detailed instructions as

well as treatment to irresponsibility and rewards, lack of procedures applied for

heads

e) Proposing some measures for higher effectiveness of settlement

To complete law on claims and establish administrative ruling agencies:

To accurately and legally classify, process, advice and assign to authorized

agencies;

To completely settle claims at appropriate levels:

Necessary to pay attention to training on skills and techniques specificallyinstruct investigation and verification work

f) Suggesting solutions for higher effectiveness of responsibility inspection

To accomplish the system of legal documents on responsibility inspection such

as decrees and circulars:

To clearly regulate functions and duties of heads;

To specifically regulate scope of duties of inspection agencies (provinces,ministries, sectors) in advising heads (provinces, ministries, sectors) to executerelated laws;

To specifically draw inspection plans;

To appreciate heads’ responsibilities in settling claims, to establish strict

punishment for irresponsibilities;

To themselves re-settle claims which is violated;

To select officers who are proper, competent and qualified:

To frequently train inspection officers;

To hold meetings for complicated claims which are involved in many sectorsard levels to search for an agreement on settlement measures

3 General comment on the situation of responsibility inspection

After doing research and analyzing the situation of responsibility inspection,

researchers would like to make some following comments:

3 1 Regarding law

The system of regulations on responsibility inspection by administrative bodies

is stipulated in many legal documents but mainly in law on inspection in 2010,

decree No 86/2011/ND-CP dated 09/22/2011 regulating detailed instructions on

enforcing some articles of inspection law law on claims in 1998 (amended in 2004 —

2005), decree No 136/2006/ND-CP dated 1 1/14/2006 regulating detailed instructions

on enforcing some articles of claim law and its amended law, draft law on claims in

2010 circular No 02/2010/TT-TTCP dated 03/02/2010 by the government

inspectorate regulating an inspection procedure;

The process of implementation shows that law on inspection still possesses

certain drawbacks For example, because regulations on responsibility inspection arestipulated in many legal documents, they lack of centralization and uniformity;

Decrees and circulars regulating responsibility inspection has not been

established and issued, causing many difficulties to inspectorate, limiting the effectiveness of inspection work.

3.2 Implementation of responsibility inspection

Heads of state agencies in some places are not fully aware of their dutiesregulated in law on authority, procedure and implementation measures as well as donot pay much attention to managing officers, instructing inspection work, avoid tosettle claims, causing prolonged claims

One of many causes of the above situation is lack of full awareness of theimportance of inspection, claim settlement and responsibility inspection from

authority including inspectors of all levels and sectors Moreover, proper evaluation

on situation and causes leading to ineffective settlement, determination of common

and individual responsibilities in settling claims, therefore, solutions to improve

shortcomings in the process are absent.

Officers are limited in profession and qualification due to regular job changes

and movements.

Inspection officers do not meet requirements on competence, knowledge ofpolicies and law, practical experience, being confused in settling claims, not beingable discover problems and propose solutions

Functions and duties of heads of agencies are not been clarified and

appreciated.

Higher agencies do not usually supervise and steer lower levels’ execution

Inspection officers do not follow the right procedure including establishingdetaied plans clarifying purposes, requirements, contents, locations, subjects,duration and methodology which leads to ineffective implementation.

In reality, many inspectorate does not define focal points, propose manycontents which distract them from the important ones Consequently, conclusions aregeneral, judgements and evaluations are not profound, reasons for shortcomings arenot clarified, suggestions for treatment to violations are not demonstrated

Responsibility inspectorate in settling claims do not well execute inspectioncontents and requirements Many of them just listen to reports on local situation,agencies and claim results but do not carefully examine transfered documents If any.unthorough execution could not discover shortcomings and mistakes, especially, incomplicated cases

Many conclusions in settling claims are cursory; do not demonstrate thesituation and reasons of claims as well as fully evaluate results of claim settlement;

do not draw causes of shortcomings and responsibilities of related parties; do notpropose solutions; therefore, responsibility inspection is conducted but prolonged andcomplicated claims exist

CONCLUSION — CHAPTER 2

By analyzing and evaluating situation of responsibility inspection for stateagencies, researchers realize that the legal system in genral and law on claims inparticular maintain inadequate due to the fact that regulations are stipulated in many

documents, therefore, unconcentrated and asynchronous.

Circulars on procedures of responsibility inspection have not been establishedand issued, which causes difficulties in implementing work

Inspection officers are limited in professtion and skills due to being changedand moved for work as well as not cooperated among steps during settlement

process.

Training for better awareness and competence of officers are not paid attention

to by heads of agencies, training programmes are not innovated

Heads’ responsibilities are not highly appreciated, which leads to avoidance,delay and low effectiveness of claim settlement

State management agencies do not focus on propagenda and education of law to

citizens, causing low awareness of a part of citizens.

Chapter 3RECOMMENDATIONS AND SOLUTIONS TO IMPROVE

EFFICIENCY OF RESPONSIBILITY INSPECTION OF THE STATE

ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES IN RESOLVING COMPLAINTS

1 Some measures to improve efficiency of responsibility inspection applied foradministrative agencies in settlement of claims

1.1 Solutions for inspection sector

As analysed in Chapter 2 to improve the operational efficiency of Statemanagement, it is a must to conduct frequent inspections of responsibilities forhandling complaints by the authorities and sectors, particularly local authorities

To improve the quality and efficiency of inspection activities of responsibilitiesfor handling complaints, the inspection agencies should implement some of the

following issues:

1.1.1 Raising awareness of responsibility inspection

The inspectorate should be fully aware of the responsibility, the role andsignificance of the inspection regarding implementing the provisions of law oncomplaints So it is a need to undertake a strong proactive innovation in terms ofawareness and direction of inspection in general and inspecting in particular It is alsonecessary to promote the role and responsibilities in advising the heads of stateadministrative agencies at the same level in directing and organizing the conduct ofthe inspections by focusing more on inspecting responsibilities of all levels anddepartments in implementing the law on complaints

All levels and sectors, especially heads of state administrative agencies should

be thoroughly aware of the importance of inspection of responsibilities Clearlydefine the responsibility to regularly inspect one of the important measures, mainlydecisive to the effectiveness of inspection and complaint resolution

1.1.2 Strengthening the leadership of local authorities

Over the years, the fact showed where the authorities concerned, provided closeand decicive direction, the inspection work, the settlement of claims thereat marked

improvement inspection activities are conducted regularly and effectively, thecomplaint cases were handled timely since arising from the grassroot Therefore, thenumber of the complicated, outstanding and crowded and beyond complaint levelcases sharply decreased Conversely, in some sectors and localities, the inspectionwork is not adequately valued the failings, shortcomings or difficulties and problemsare not timely resolved, leading to violation of order and disciplines managementrules are not considered significant, weaknesses getting more and more exacerbated.creating more negative acts In some places, the original complaint situationoccurred at normal levels but committees, the government did not pay due care, notproperly respected the receiving citizens and settling complaints and shirkingresponsibility, transferring applications around, handling not arrive to the place.violations of the order, procedures and time limits, statute of limitations for settlingcomplaints led to more complex cases, making people disagreed and get angry.

1.1 3 Planning responsibility inspection

To improve the quality of the inspection, the concerning state inspectionagencies should pay more attention in the organization and conduct of responsibility

inspection.

Inspection shall be carried out actively, regularly and limit the random ones(except in special cases) This requires planning the inspection The direction forpreparation, approval and implementation annual inspection plans must be conducted

im accordance with law, consistent with the orientation of the inspection as adopted

by the Prime Minister and governance management requirements of branches andlocalities

Construction of inspection plans shali be specific, requiring focal points andmteasures for carrying out clearly and appropriately, with the motto "do little buthiighly effective", avoid spreading and "movement" nature inspections It is aloso anecessary to apply innovative methods, providing procedures to conduct inspectionsoff responsibility, and guidance to implementing agencies

1.1.4 Completing statutory regulations on inspection in general and that ofresponsibilities in particular

Responsibility inspection shall be of regular activities of State inspectorate to bedeployed at all levels and sectors Inspection activities shall have certain differencesfrom socio-economic inspection and complaints and denunciations ones, so theapplication of the general inspection process will not work

Therefore, to improve the efficiency of responsibility inspection, along with thecompletion of the inspection law, the law on complaints, it is necessary to soonpromulgate documents guiding the professional processes related to the inspectionand complaints resolution, especially the process of responsibility inspection Theenactment of the inspection process not only ensures the implementation of legalprocedures, inspection procedures but also is one of the most important method ofinaproving the quality and effectiveness of the inspection activities

Inspection of responsibilities to implement laws on inspection, the complaint isconducted by superiors to subordinates in the system of administrative agencies, it isalso the duty inspection - a form of administrative inspection So basically it mustcomply with the law on inspection, like Inspection Law, the Decree of theGovernment and the provisions relating to inspection activities issued by theGovernment General Inspector other provisions of relevant laws However, theponsibility inspection has its own characteristics, which majors in inspecting theimplementation of the responsibilities and duties of management, not involving insolving a particular case, therefore the reponsibility inspection process, in additionthe provisions of the order, inspection procedures must clearly define inspectionauthority, subject to inspection, content of inspection and request the conclusion ofthe inspection This is the most problematic issue in conducting the responsibilityimspection

1.1.5 Choosing the appropriate inspection form and content

Like other forms of inspection, the responsibility inspection shall include aspllanned, regular and unscheduled inspections To avoid waste of time for theimspectors and subjects to inspection, reducing inconvenience to the localities, giving