Development of administrative law in globalization and integration period: a case study of Viet Nam

Master Program on State Administration Reform (PAR) 2011-2020 period defines the objective as follows: “administrative reform will focus on institutional reform; building and [r]

(1)

DEVELOPMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

IN THE GLOBALIZATION AND INTEGRATION PERIOD: A CASE STUDY OF VIETNAM

Dr Phan Thi Lan Huong – Hanoi Law University Dr Nguyen Huy Binh – The People’s Police Academy Abstract

Administrative law is not purely a domestic law of a country In the globalization and integration period, every nation must reform its legal system in response to international standards Entering the 21st century, globalization has brought about stronger competition in business and put pressure on governments to develop economic, political and social conditions in which the private sector can compete more effectively Globalization and its influences require governments to change and respond to rapid economic, social, political and technological trends In addition, people’s increasing dissatisfaction with government functions and services provided by the administrative apparatus also requires governments to reform their administrative law In particular, “good governance” and rule of law state have been introduced as key standards for developing countries that are in the process of reforming public administration

Vietnam has carried out administrative reforms since the 1990s with the main focus on building an effective, efficient, strong, and transparent government Therefore, it is a good example for studying the influences of globalization and integration on administrative law

This paper aims at answering the following questions: (1) How is administrative law of a country influenced by globalization; (2) What are global standards of administrative law; and (3) How to reform administrative law in the case of Vietnam?

This paper first analyses administrative reform in Vietnam, then identifies the gaps of administrative law in comparison with international standards, including good governance and rule of law state Specifically, this paper focuses on current issues of the public servants, of administrative procedures, and corruption control as the three main areas of administrative law in comparison with international standards for analysing the influence of globalization and integration

1 Changing of administrative law in the globalization period

(2)

ASIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND TRENDS

22

reforms, deregulations, and privatization through legislative measures1 Globalization requires the changes from centralization and command-control oriented to the open market oriented Hence, it is essential to engage in the delivery of public services2 “Globalization has transformed the functions and the roles of the state”3 Every country recognizes the crucial need to improve governance and public administration as well as to build capacity of state bodies to carry out new functions and new roles4 Consequently, administrative law must be changed in response to changes of the functions of the government As public–private partnerships call for new ways to implement its responsibilities by the government, administrative law must ensure the transparency, fairness, and participation of the private sector5.

Administrative law establishes norms to control the organization and operation of the government6 In other words, administrative law controls the performance of government bureaucrats Administrative law establishes effective, transparent and accountable institutions at all levels Although socioeconomic and political conditions deffer from country to country, the same standards such as good governance and rule by law state have been adopted in many countries under the pressure of global integration Administrative law plays a role as a tool for preventing the government and public officials from abuse of state power and corruption Administrative law governs the exercise of power and duties of public officials and government bureaucrats7 As administrative organs have discretion in implementing the tasks and functions and delivering public services, public officials can take advantage of or benefit from their positions

In addition, a famous “government captured theory” that illustrates the government rules was developed to meet the interest of industries or controlled by corporations8 This theory emphasizes 1 Jeffrey A Hart and Aseem Prakash, Coping with Globalization (Routledge, 2003), 29.thereby creating new opportunities and threats for governments and firms The resultant restructuring of policy spaces requires an emphasis on the need to cope with globalization, since the distribution of its costs and benefits is asymmetrical across countries, sectors, firms and factors Unlike previous books, Coping with Globalization concentrates firmly on conceptual issues, in order to consider in detail the coping strategies of both firms and governments.”,”ISBN”:”978-1-134-58517-5”,”note”:”Google-Books-ID: taqBAgAAQBAJ”,”language”:”en”,”author”:[{“family”:”Hart”,”given”:”Jeffrey A.” },{“family”:”Prakash”,”given”:”Aseem”}],”issued”:{“date-parts”:[[“2003”,9,2]]}},”locator”:”29”,”label”:”page”}], ”schema”:”https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json”}

2 Alfred C Aman, “The Limits of Globalization and the Future of Administrative Law: From Government to Governance,” INDIANA JOURNAL OF GLOBAL LEGAL STUDIES (n.d.): 379.

3 Dennis A Rondinelli and G Shabbir Cheema, Reinventing Government for the Twenty-First Century: State Capacity in a Globalizing Society (Kumarian Press, 2003), 22.

4 Rondinelli and Cheema,

5 Aman, “The Limits of Globalization and the Future of Administrative Law: From Government to Governance,” 382 6 Hart and Prakash, Coping with Globalization, 67.thereby creating new opportunities and threats for governments

and firms The resultant restructuring of policy spaces requires an emphasis on the need to cope with globalization, since the distribution of its costs and benefits is asymmetrical across countries, sectors, firms and factors Unlike previous books, Coping with Globalization concentrates firmly on conceptual issues, in order to consider in detail the coping strategies of both firms and governments.”,”ISBN”:”978-1-134-58517-5”,”note”:”Google-Books-ID: taqBAgAAQBAJ”,”language”:”en”,”author”:[{“family”:”Hart”,”given”:”Jeffrey A.”},{“family”:”Prakash”,”given” :”Aseem”}],”issued”:{“date-parts”:[[“2003”,9,2]]}},”locator”:”67”,”label”:”page”}],”schema”:”https://github.com/ citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json”}

(3)

23

DEVELOPMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW IN THE GLOBALIZATION AND INTEGRATION PERIOD:

the role of interest groups in making public policies because these policies affect their own interests1 Therefore, preventing decision-makers from influences of interest groups is also crucial for maintaining the fairness and effectiveness of public administration

Good governance and rule of law state are international standards for every country in the current globalization era “The rule of law remains the key concept, ensuring all public and private bodies, as well as individuals, act only according to the law”2 Good governance is an essential requirement for achieving each Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)3 Good governance standards include six principles for public services, i.e.: “(1) engaging stakeholders and making accountability real; (2) focusing on the organization’s purposes and on outcomes for citizens and service users; (3) performing effectively in clearly defined functions and roles; (4) promoting values for the whole organization and demonstrative good governance through behavior; (5) taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risks; (6) developing the capacity and capability of the governing to be effective”4 Therefore, the state government has reformed its laws, especially administrative law to follow the rule of law and good governance standards In particular, the Agenda 2030 determines Goal number 16th of the MDGs: “peace, justice and strong institution” with the specific targets as follows:

“16.3 Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all;

16.4 By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime

16.5 Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms

16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels

16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all level”5 The specific tasks of Goal number 16 of the Agenda 2030 reaffirmed the standards of rule of law and good governance standards, including transparency, accountability, fairness and prevention of corruption A member state must develop its action plan to achieve these tasks To implement the Agenda 2030, the Prime Minister issued Decision No.622/QĐ-TTg, dated 10 May 2015, to ratify National Action Plan for implementing the Agenda 2030 towards sustainable development This Decision identifies key tasks in the period 2017-2020, including: developing a comprehensive institutional mechanism; continuously reforming the legal system and policy through promulgation, modification of the current legal system for implementing the Action Plan and sustainable development targets; promoting the effectiveness of state management of sustainable development It is evident that Vietnam needs to reform administrative law for achievement of the MDGs, as mentioned by the Agenda 2030

1 Jean-Jacques Laffont, “The Politics of Government Decision-Making: A Theory of Regulatory Capture,” n.d., 1–2 2 Peter Leyland and Gordon Anthony, Textbook on Administrative Law (OUP Oxford, 2012), 5.

3 Rondinelli and Cheema, Reinventing Government for the Twenty-First Century, 9.

4 Alan Langlands, England) Office for Public Management (London, and Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, The Good Governance Standard for Public Services (London: OPM: CIPFA, 2004), 4.

(4)

24

2 Administrative law reform in Vietnam and its remaining issues in comparison with international standards

Globalization has caused changes in the legal systems in Asian countries as well as in other parts of the world Vietnam has carried out administrative reform through the development and implementation of the Master Plans on administrative reform 2001-2010 and 2011-2020 periods

Master Program on State Administration Reform (PAR) 2011-2020 period defines the objective as follows: “administrative reform will focus on institutional reform; building and raising of the quality of the contingent of cadres, civil servants and public employees, attaching importance to reforming salary policies as a true momentum for cadres, civil servants and public employees to perform public duties with high quality and effectiveness: and raising the quality of administrative and public services”1 From 2011, Vietnam has conducted institutional reform through amending the 1992 Constitution in 2013 The 2013 Constitution created significant changes in institutional reform by introducing clear principles of distribution of functions among the three legislative, executive and judicial branches Following the 2013 Constitution, many laws related to the organization and operation of state bodies were amended, for example Law on Organization of Government (2015); Law on Local Government (2015); Law on Organization of the Court (2014); Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Document (2015) These laws aim at developing a strong, effective, efficient, clean, and transparent government Changing from central planned economy to open market under socialist orientation was a turning point of Vietnam

In addition, Vietnam has made great efforts in reforming its legal system in general, and administrative law in particular, since it became a member of WTO, ASEAN Community and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) recently For example, Vietnam established the administrative tribunal in 1996, and amended Law on Complaint (2011) and Law on the Administrative Lawsuit Proceeding (2015) for better protection of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and organizations This was done in recognition of WTO’s requirement that a member state has to reform its administrative law system to ensure transparency, independent mechanism for reviewing administrative actions2 Obviously, Vietnam has managed to Resolution No.30c/NQ-CP on Master Program on State Administration Reform (PAR) 2011-2020 period, dated 08

November 2011, Article

(5)

Asia.”,”ISBN”:”978-25

increase its competitive Index from 16.85 in 2007 to 61.54 in 20191 through institutional reforms, eliminating obstacles in administrative procedures

Vietnam has strong commitments to achieve the MDGs as a member country of the MDGs and the Agenda 2030 However, there are still some key issues in Vietnam’s administrative law that are considered as challenges in the process of building rule of law state and ensuring good governance standards as follows:

2.1 Effective, Accountable and Transparent Institutions

Institutional reform is a prerequisite for good governance Although Vietnam has amended its Constitution in 2013 and its laws related to the organization and operation of government, effective, accountable, and transparent standards cannot be achieved due to some remaining issues of administrative law as follows:

Administrative procedures are inconsistent and overlapped: Administrative procedures are formulated by various competent agencies and included in different legal documents such as status laws and substantive regulations Administrative procedures include many types, such as: (1) procedures for imposing administrative sanctions; (2) procedures of employing public officials; procedures of issuing permits for building construction; procedures in issuing land use right certificate; procedures for issuing certificate of business registration; procedures for issuing certificatees on investment registration, etc The Government and Ministries and Ministerial level agencies have issued a significant number of substantive documents (i.e., Decrees and Circulars) on providing detailed procedures for implementation Consequently, regulations on administrative procedures are inconsistent and overlapped, which causes many problems to individuals and organizations Administrative procedures are considered as barriers that prevent enterprises and individuals from executing their rights and obligations Hence, abolishing and reducing unnecessary and complicated administrative procedures was an urgent task of the government in 2017 For example, the Special Task Force of the Ministry of Industry in 2017 and 2018 was required to scrutinize all administrative procedures and business conditions for simplification or abolishment2 Moreover, Vietnam does not have a law on licensing like some other countries Therefore, each specialized status law as well as the guidelines for implementation (i.e., Decrees and Circulars) shall provide detailed conditions for issuing or depriving the right of using the license in specific fields of public administration As a result, the conditions for licensing are different among the areas Due to the lack of consistent administrative procedures in Vietnam, administrative agencies have more discretion in formulating administrative procedures for their field of management; consequently, there is a “jungle of administrative procedures”

1-135-97064-2”,”note”:”Google-Books-ID: Ez6UAgAAQBAJ”,”title-short”:”Administrative Law and Governance in Asia”,”language”:”en”,”author”:[{“family”:”Ginsburg”,”given”:”Tom”},{“family”:”Chen”,”given”:”Albert H Y.”}],”issued”:{“date-parts”:[[“2008”,10,30]]}},”locator”:”364”,”label”:”page”}],”schema”:”https://github.com/ citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json”}

(6)

26

in Vietnam Just as an example, during months in 2019 alone, 3,425 out of 6,191 administrative procedures related to business licenses were cut off1.

- E-government and one-stop-shop model has been carried out in Vietnam as the requirement of administrative reform Vietnam introduced e-government and one-stop-shop model at the provincial level as an example of institutional reform and procedural reform The E-government program still has some issues and challenges such as lack of leaders’ roles in providing directions and guidelines for performing tasks; lack of an effective guarantee mechanism for the implementation of the tasks of building e-government; lack of a consistent legal framework on building e-government; lack of financial and investment mechanisms suitable to specific information technology projects; lack of specific regulations on identification and authentication of individuals and organizations in electronic transactions; and lack of legislative regulations on electronic documents and archives2

- Unclear delegation of power between the central and local governments: Both the central government and local governments operate and organize under democratic-centralism principle The central government holds power to control local governments and it can easily interfere in the work of local governments Law on Organization of Government defines: “Properly delegate and decentralize governing powers between the Government and local governments and assure the consistent management power of the Government and promote initiative, creativity and responsible autonomy of local governments”3 There is a unclear delegation of power from central to local In other words, it is very difficult to determine what is proper delegation and decentralization of governing power In addition, the remaining “Government-centred” and “command–control” relationship between the central and local governments cannot determine clearly the accountability of administrative organs In addition, shifting responsibilities among state organs remains a serious issue For example, the central government had to handle 20-25% of work shifted from ministries or local authorities because the lower levels tried to avoid the controversial and complicated issues4 Heads of agencies are reluctant to deal with difficult cases and “passing the ball” still happens in collabouration among state organs

- Collective decision-making regime: the current operating mechanism is also difficult for determining the accountability of the head of administrative organs The government and the People’s Committee at all levels apply the collective decision-making regime “The Government shall work under the collective working regime and the majority rule”5; “The Government’s decisions

must obtain more than half of the cabinet members voting in favour In case the vote is equal, the Prime Minister shall have the deciding vote”6 Similarly, the People’s Committee at local levels are also working under the collective decision-making regime Although the laws make a distinction between governing power and jurisdiction between an administrative organ and the head of the organ, for example, responsibilities of the Prime Minister are different from the responsibilities of the Government, the collective decision-making regime is still considered as an obstacle in building accountable government

1 “Cắt Giảm Giấy Phép: Chính Phủ u Cầu ‘Nói Đi Đôi Với Làm,’” baodientu.chinhphu.vn, accessed October 6, 2019, http://baochinhphu.vn/Kinh-te/Cat-giam-giay-phep-Chinh-phu-yeu-cau-noi-di-doi-voi-lam/370930.vgp

2 Resolution No.17/2019

3 Law on Organization of Government, 2015, Article 5.4

4 “Cơ Chế Tạo Ra Đùn Đẩy Trách Nhiệm!,” accessed October 19, 2019, https://www.thesaigontimes.vn/151940/Co-che-tao-ra-dun-day-trach-nhiem!.html

(7)

27

- Weak performance assessment: Law on public servants and cadres (2008) defines the assessment of work performed as: “Civil servants who fail to accomplish their tasks for consecutive years will be disallowed to continue their work by competent agencies, organizations or units”1 However, in reality, performance assessment remains very weak because of the lack of effectiveness indicators of assessment Assessment has been carried out as the final evaluation procedure and the government does not take into consideration of this assessment

2.2 Corruption Control

Corruption is a critical issue in developing countries because of lack of transparency and independent ombudsman mechanism It is difficult to “gain access to public services for people who lack personal influence or money”2 Vietnam enacted Law on Anti-Corruption in 2005 and amended it in 2007, 2012 and 2018 It shows Vietnam’s effort in fighting against corruption According to a 2016 survey, citizen’s evaluation of anti-corruption campaigns have had a measurable effect on the public sector, however the level of concern about corruption remains high3 According to Transparency Index 2018, “Vietnam ranked 117th amongst 180 countries and territories, dropping by 10 places compared to 2017 It scored 33 points out of 100 in the 2018 CPI, down two points compared to 2017”4 This number reveals that fighting against corruption is one of the significant challenges in the process of building rule of law and good governance Taking advantage from position is considered as a crucial matter of corruption Findings from PAPI 2018 indicate that being connected with someone who has connections with government officials will be easier for citizens to have a job in the public sector5 The Vietnamese government has made great efforts in fighting against corruption in public employment, delivery of public services, administrative disposition upon application (land use right certificate; construction permit) and adverse disposition (farmland seizures, imposing administrative sanctions), as prescribed through a survey conducted by UNDP in Vietnam in the table below

Trends in Corruption as Perceived by Citizens, 2011-20186

1 Law on Public servants and cadres, 2008, Article 58.3

2 Rondinelli and Cheema, Reinventing Government for the Twenty-First Century, 26.

3 UNDP, The Vietnam provincial governance and public administration performance Index 2018, page 20

4 “Vietnam’s Corruption Perception Ranking Declines in 2018,” Vietnam Briefing News, February 8, 2019, https:// www.vietnam-briefing.com/news/vietnams-corruption-perception-ranking-declines-2018.html/

(8)

28

Law on Anti-corruption 2018 provides preventive measures, for example Article 34 requires all public officials to declare assets and income (not only public officials in position) and the type of assets and income are also specified in detail Specifically, the law defines that: “In the cases where there is a change of at least VND 300,000,000 that is not declared, the asset surveillance authority shall request provision of additional information; origins of any additional assets and income must be explained”1 Currently, Vietnam has made great efforts in handling serious corrupted cases committed by high ranking public officials It is a significant example of corruption fighting in Vietnam However, the root causes of corruption have not yet been dealt with, such as the inadequate salary, which is considered as a reason for committing corruption acts; lack of an effective mechanism to control abusing state powers; an ineffective mechanism for monitoring assets, etc

Participation of citizen in decision-making is one key factor of good governance It requires both the central and local governments to create an effective mechanism for ensuring participation of citizens Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Document (2015) defines that all draft legal documents must be open for public comments2 The issues of measuring how citizens participate in local making and how local governments facilitate citizens to participate in the decision-making process were examined by the PAPI 2018 According to the PAPI survey, the scores of the public participation were still very low, as follows:

“Scores for Participation at Local Levels remained at the average level in 2018, as in previous years There is not a large range in provincial performance scores, with the difference between the highest (6.16 points) and lowest (4.41 points) dimensional scores only 1.75 points (on the to 10-point scale) This implies that all provinces performed at the average level in engaging citizens in local government affairs”3

However, Vietnam still lacks effective mechanisms for ensuring the quality of public participation in decision-making Although the Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Document requires competent organs to publish drafted documents for public comments, it does not determine the obligations to explain in written form the reasons for not accepting their comments In other words, are decision-makers open to and committed to considering inputs in the decision-making process? If they not take appropriate measures for the public to raise opinions, what legal liability should be applied?

Remarkably, the policy-decision is not an object of judicial review According to the Law on Administrative Case Proceedings, only specific unlawful decisions/acts are under jurisdiction of the Court In addition, competent organs or persons not bear any responsibilities in explaining the “reasonability” of a decision Unlawful and infringement of interests is only legal grounds for the review decision issued by competent persons In addition to that, a public hearing is not a compulsory procedure for making adverse disposition Consequently, individuals or organizations cannot exercise the right to participate in the decision-making process effectively and efficiently

1 Law on Anti-corruption, 2018, Article 44

2 Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Documents, 2015, Article 6.2

(9)

29

2.3 Delivery of Public Services

Global integration requires participation of the private sector in the provision of public services The government needs to ensure that citizens have access to quality education and health care, and infrastructure facilities such as public transport or water system1 Privatization can generate revenue and reduce administration responsibilities and the burden of the government in governing state-owned enterprises (SOEs)2 From 1992, like other transition economies, the Vietnamese government launched a privatization process with the aim of improving the performance of SOEs In other words, the Vietnamese government must shift the role of SOEs in providing public services to the private sector

Reducing the number of SOEs is one of the most important targets of Vietnam in this global era The number of SOEs has dropped dramatically from 1309 to 950 in the 2011-2015 period and is expected to reduce to 190 by the end of 20203 Decision No.1232, dated 17 August 2017, issued by the Prime Minister, provides the list of state-invested enterprises undergoing divestment in the 2017-2020 period “The process of privatization proceeded in a slow and gradual manner, starting with the easier and smaller SOEs and then continuing with the more difficult and larger ones”4 Until now, only 88 SOEs have been divested Consequently, only 27.5% of the target for the 2016 – 2020 period was completed5 Regarding to the legal framework on privatization, the Government has issued some Decrees related to privatization of SOEs, such as Decree No.167/2017, Decree No.126/2017 and Decree No.32/2018 for engaging the private sector’s participation in providing public services In addition, the Government also issued Decree No.63/2018 on public-private partnership, dated 04 May 2018 However, speeding up and controlling privatization remain big challenges in Vietnam

Recently, the Government issued Decree No.32/2019 on assigning, ordering or bidding for the provision of public services and products using state budget for annual expenditures This Decree engages the private sector in providing public service through assignment, request or bidding The conditions for assignment, request, or bidding are prescribed in detail However, controlling the quality of public services delivery is a challenge for the Vietnamese government For example, health care and education services have been privatized (i.e., socialized) but citizens are seriously concerned about the quality of these services Moreover, when the quality of public service delivered by the private 1 Rondinelli and Cheema, Reinventing Government for the Twenty-First Century, 29.

2 Rondinelli and Cheema, 43

3 “Privatizing SOEs - Implications for Foreign Investors,” 2017, 24

4 Ngo My Tran, Walter Nonneman, and Ann Jorissen, “Privatization of Vietnamese Firms and Its Effects on Firm Performance,” Asian Economic and Financial Review 5, no (2015): 203, https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.aefr/2015.5.2/102.2.202.217. this study overcomes some shortcomings in previous studies on the effect of privatization on performance in transition economies such as no control of selection bias and the inadequateness to single out the privatization effect from the concurrent effects of other economic factors We find that a shift from state or collective ownership to private ownership can consistently enhance the performance of switchers in terms of profitability This suggests that privatization is an efficient way to improve the financial performance of Vietnamese state-owned enterprises.”,”DOI”:”10.18488/ journal.aefr/2015.5.2/102.2.202.217”,”ISSN”:”23052147, 22226737”,”journalAbbreviation”:”Asian Economic and Financial Review”,”language”:”en”,”author”:[{“family”:”Tran”,”given”:”Ngo My”},{“family”:”Nonneman”,”give n”:”Walter”},{“family”:”Jorissen”,”given”:”Ann”}],”issued”:{“date-parts”:[[“2015”]]}},”locator”:”203”,”label”:”p age”}],”schema”:”https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json”}

(10)

30

sector does not meet requirements or standards, it is not clear how public service users can seek legal address or remedies It is evident that developing a good system for providing public service with the participation of the private sector is a crucial issue in Vietnam

3 Conclusion

Globalization and integration create a new theory of “global administrative law” because governments face new global problems that require global solutions1 Administrative law has been changed in every country to respond to rule of law and good governance standards Administrative law is not merely a domestic law that relates directly to the rights and interests of individuals and organizations

Administrative law also ensures a competitive, transparent and fair environment for economic development Both the public and the private sectors are equal in providing public services Reducing the burden of the government and shifting the role of SOEs in the delivery of public services to the private sector is crucial needs for any country in the transactional period from central planned economy to an open market economy Rule of law and good governance has become global standards which require a country to conduct legal reforms to achieve the MDGs The Vietnamese government needs to promote reforming the administrative law as follows:

Firstly, the development of a comprehensive law on administrative procedures is crucial for ensuring accountable and transparent standards Administrative procedure is the process of exercising state power of a competent person or a state organ in dealing with application or adverse disposition Administrative procedure must be transparent and advanced technology must be applied for simplifying and reducing the burden of paperwork for individuals and organizations E-government and one-stop-shop model should be promoted effectively for enabling individuals and organizations to access public services more easily Vietnam should consider enacting the Law of Administrative Procedure like Japan or the U.S

Secondly, strengthening corruption control is also important for good governance Vietnam should follow the requirements of the UN Convention on Anti-Corruption such as “promoting adequate remuneration and equitable pay scales”2 for public officials In addition, Vietnam needs to develop an effective mechanism for controlling declaration of assets of public officials as well as imposing obligation to give a reasonable explanation of the increasing assets and income

Thirdly, accountable government can be enhanced through promoting transparency in decentralization and delegation of power Law on Local Government should include provision jer the cases that the central government can interfere with the work of local governments Tasks, power, and functions of each state organs must be clarified bylaws for preventing state organs from blaming or shifting responsibility to each other

Fourthly, promoting privatization by developing a comprehensive legal framework on public-private partnership is a crucial need for Vietnam in transitional periods The public-private sector should be effectively engaged in the delivery of public service The Government needs to improve the quality of public services delivery through developing an effective quality control system

(11)

31

Finally, promoting public participation in the decision-making process is also important for Vietnam to minimize influences of interest groups on decision-makers in the process of formulating policies In addition, reasonable standards should be added as a ground for judicial review In other words, individuals and organizations can request a competent person/organ or the court to review a decision or an act that is unlawful or unreasonable

In brief, administrative law of Vietnam must meet requirements of global standards Vietnam can achieve the MDGs mentioned by Agenda 2030, especially Goal number 16th by reforming the administrative law towards building up accountable, transparent institutions, controlling corruption and promoting the quality of public service delivery Citizens and organizations can exercise their rights without any barriers or obstacles Administrative organs will serve the people, for the people./ References

Aman, Alfred C “The Limits of Globalization and the Future of Administrative Law: From Government to Governance.” INDIANA JOURNAL OF GLOBAL LEGAL STUDIES (n.d.): 23 Baodientu.chinhphu.vn “Cắt Giảm Giấy Phép: Chính Phủ u Cầu ‘Nói Đi Đôi Với Làm.’” Accessed October 6, 2019 http://baochinhphu.vn/Kinh-te/Cat-giam-giay-phep-Chinh-phu-yeu-cau-noi-di-doi-voi-lam/370930.vgp

Cassese, Sabino Research Handbook on Global Administrative Law Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016. “Cơ Chế Tạo Ra Đùn Đẩy Trách Nhiệm!” Accessed October 19, 2019 https://www.thesaigontimes

vn/151940/Co-che-tao-ra-dun-day-trach-nhiem!.html

Ginsburg, Tom, and Albert H Y Chen Administrative Law and Governance in Asia: Comparative Perspectives Routledge, 2008.

Hanoi Times “Vietnam Gov`t Urges Faster SOE Privatization.” Accessed October 20, 2019 http:// www.hanoitimes.vn/economy/2019/07/81e0d926/vietnam-gov-t-urges-faster-soe-privatization/ Harlow, Carol, and Richard Rawlings Law and Administration Cambridge University Press, 2006. Hart, Jeffrey A., and Aseem Prakash Coping With Globalization Routledge, 2003.

Laffont, Jean-Jacques “The Politics of Government Decision-Making : A Theory of Regulatory Capture,” n.d., 66

Langlands, Alan, England) Office for Public Management (London, and Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy The Good Governance Standard for Public Services London: OPM: CIPFA, 2004

Leyland, Peter, and Gordon Anthony Textbook on Administrative Law OUP Oxford, 2012.

Li, Lin, He Tian, and Yanbin Lv Rule of Law in China: A Ten-Year Review (2002-2012) Springer, 2019

Martin “Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions.” United Nations Sustainable Development (blog) Accessed October 17, 2019 https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/peace-justice/

“Privatizing SOEs - Implications for Foreign Investors,” 2017, 24

(12)

32

Tran, Ngo My, Walter Nonneman, and Ann Jorissen “Privatization of Vietnamese Firms and Its Effects on Firm Performance.” Asian Economic and Financial Review 5, no (2015): 202–17 https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.aefr/2015.5.2/102.2.202.217

(13)

Thank you for evaluating AnyBizSoft PDF Splitter.

A watermark is added at the end of each output PDF file

To remove the watermark, you need to purchase the software from

Định dạng
Số trang	13
Dung lượng	553,87 KB