Vietnam Cracks Down on Citizens Interacting with 'Anti-State' Social Media: Free Speech Concerns Grow

Vietnamese authorities are increasingly summoning and imposing administrative penalties on citizens for 'interacting' with websites and pages deemed 'anti-state' on social media. Previously, the focus was primarily on individuals who posted or shared 'false or provocative information.' However, recent developments suggest that engagements such as 'likes' and comments on 'anti-state sites' may also become subject to punishment, causing growing anxiety among the populace. Reports indicate that in Danang, 79 people have been summoned for questioning, along with 63 in Quang Ngai, 45 in Hue, and 135 in Ha Tinh. Authorities accuse these individuals of interacting with 'anti-state figures' and 'destructive websites.' A lawyer from Hanoi, speaking on condition of anonymity, told BBC Vietnamese that while terms like 'anti-state' and 'destructive activities' are frequently used in political and social discourse, they are not independent legal concepts and should not be used as grounds for punishment in all situations. He stated that under current law, simply 'interacting' with a site labeled 'anti-state' should not lead to punishment. In recent cases, German-based journalist Le Trung Khoa and former lawyer and dissident Nguyen Van Dai have been convicted by Vietnamese authorities of 'state subversion.' Both continue their activities from abroad, and an increasing number of Vietnamese citizens who 'like' or comment on their critical content are being summoned by authorities. Regarding the 135 people summoned in Ha Tinh, Vietnamese media reported that these individuals had commented on or 'liked' 'negative or distorted content' since 2020. However, details about what specific content was deemed 'erroneous' or the precise actions taken by the citizens have not been clearly disclosed. In the case of 45 individuals summoned in Hue, authorities stated they had 'frequently followed, accessed, commented on, shared, or expressed emotions (liked) content from systems of exiled anti-state figures like Le Trung Khoa, Nguyen Van Dai, and other destructive pages, which contained fake news, fabrications, distortions, and destructive information.' However, the authorities have not publicly released a specific list of 'anti-state sites,' leading to public questions about which sites are problematic. The lawyer pointed out that without an official, updated, and legally binding list, it is difficult for ordinary citizens to know in advance which sites are considered 'anti-state.' While citizens have an obligation to abide by the law, the state also has a duty to ensure the transparency and predictability of legal norms, he emphasized. Social media users find themselves in a situation where it is unclear which sites are 'anti-state,' what level of 'interaction' constitutes a violation, and what specific laws are being broken. Critics argue that instead of providing clear explanations, authorities sometimes resort to vague information or confrontational responses. The lawyer explained that to impose administrative or criminal penalties, the competent authorities must clearly identify the specific actions of the individual, the content they posted, shared, or commented on, the violated provisions, the infringed objects, the degree of fault, and the consequences. He particularly noted that 'likes' or emoticons may not always signify agreement but could be mere bookmarks, follows, or reflexive social media actions, and should not be equated with sharing or dissemination if not legally defined as an independent violation. Conversely, comments, as direct content creation, carry a higher legal risk. Source: BBC Vietnamese