Vietnam Supreme Court Proposes Judges Be 'Not Required to Account' for Cases

Vietnam's Supreme People's Court (TAND Tối cao) has proposed a new mechanism allowing judges to be 'not required to account' to anyone regarding cases under their review, aiming to protect their independent judicial activities and personal safety. This proposal is part of a draft resolution on the protection regime for judges, expected to be submitted to the Standing Committee of the National Assembly for approval and to take effect from January 1, 2027. The draft resolution marks the first time a comprehensive protection mechanism specifically for judges is stipulated in a legal document. The Constitution stipulates that 'judges and jurors shall try cases independently and obey only the law; interference in trials by any agency, organization, or individual is strictly prohibited.' In developing the draft, the Supreme People's Court inherited the spirit of the Constitution and expanded its contents. Specifically, the draft states that judges shall not be required to perform tasks beyond their authorized scope of authority. Judges have the right to refuse requests for job arrangements outside their expertise or any requests that affect their independence, impartiality, and objectivity during the resolution of cases. Furthermore, they are not required to disclose or explain their trial opinions on cases or matters that are being handled. During this phase, they are also not subject to investigation regarding their trial proceedings, unless there are grounds to determine criminal law violations. Moreover, to protect judges' reputations, authorities have the right to order the correction or removal of false information spread about them. Judges who act on orders from superiors without knowing they are illegal may have their responsibilities reduced or exempted. During the performance of their duties, if judges have indicated in writing their refusal to carry out a decision or conclusion they deem unlawful but are still compelled to execute it, or if the rate of their judgments being overturned or amended due to subjective errors is high and requires disciplinary action but shows no signs of negativity, their responsibilities may also be reduced or exempted. Judges who proactively detect, prevent, mitigate, or promptly report their own errors are also proposed to benefit from this protection mechanism. Another new point is the protection mechanism for judges when they implement proposals for innovation and creativity for the common good, which have been approved by competent authorities. In such cases, even if damage occurs, they may still be exempted or have their responsibilities reduced. For violations that do not amount to criminal prosecution, if a judge voluntarily resigns or retires before the competent authorities detect and handle the matter, their disciplinary measures may be mitigated. The draft is currently open for public comment until August 23. Source: VnExpress