Should handle the responsibility of the head when issuing the documents without good quality

Dear Sir, how do you assess the inadequacies of many legal documents issued by the administrative agencies recently?

There are two issues, professional skill of the staff in the public offices and the spirit and attitudes of the agency leaders when they do not dare to be directly responsible. As a rule, a promulgated legal document should ensure the quality of the form and content, to be clear, coherent, comprehensible and understand only one meaning. Issuing a document must follow the process.

For example, a new circular need drafting by a chairing agency, including experts in the field, then consulting the stakeholders, after many amendments and then be submitted to, promulgated. Thus, when a document is faulty, firstly it must mention the professional qualifications of those who draft the document directly, then, the responsibility of the leader of the drafting agency in considering the document quality, finally, the responsibility of the signatory.

In my opinion, recently, the shortcomings in the process of promulgating the legal documents have included subjective and objective factors, but a mainly human factor. The problem here is the drafting, commenting and appraisal of the legal documents preparing to be issued. In addition, due to the fact that the drafting and adoption of the legal documents in the National Assembly have been still limited, so, these documents are often amended and supplemented constantly, new approved legal documents which have not entered into force yet discovered the errors and forced to modify them. The example is the case of the Penal Code 2015 and the Social Insurance Act 2014.

This shows that the developing quality of these documents is very low. This shows that there is no gathering of people with deep professional knowledge and practical understand as well as foresight and direction of the social development…

There is a sad fact, when the legal guideline documents are issued with "problems" in content, the issuing agencies will be cited by the “typing errors’ immediately. So what is your opinion on this issue?

Everyone knows, before signing any document, everyone must read, understand the content. The signer is responsible for the content of the document. That is the natural principle of legality. Filling in “typing errors’ or blaming the typists can be interpreted as an evasion act of responsibility, self -criticism, and criticism have not been true yet, the responsible people have not been straight and must be primarily responsible.

To "pick up grit", in your opinion, how should control the regulation system, the decentralization of ministries, branches, localities, executive officials?

Currently, the Ministry of Justice is the focal unit for evaluating and detecting violations in the issuance of the legal documents. However, in reality, the Ministry of Justice has not detected the errors in time, mainly, the media, the newspapers or the social networks detected and warned early.

To ensure that documents are issued with fewer errors, "fewer grits", the issuing agencies should gather the good experts and consult sincerely the reference and criticism of the organizations and individuals who come under these documents. If this is done, the issuance will have high efficiency to ensure the effective management of the State as well as positive impact on the development of society.

In addition, the drafting agencies may be required to submit the written documents to the Ministry of Justice for consideration of constitutionality, legality, transparency, accessibility, and ease of use.

At the same time, the specific social organizations such as: the League of Lawyers, the professional associations... should be included in the process of commenting and developing the legal documents. For the sub-law documents, it is also necessary to gather a team of deep professional experts, organize the good seminars, evaluations, and summaries of practices which serve as a basis for the elaboration of sub-law documents effectively.

In addition, the work of gathering comments from the specialized agencies, professional social organizations and people's comments must be substantial, open, transparent, so that, the quality of the built documents is well and they put into practice. Those agencies do not well the construction and consultation before the promulgation of documents so that it is difficult to apply the documents in practice, difficult to understand, they must be treated strictly.

Thank you, Sir!