On May 8, 2025, deputies of the National Assembly convened to discuss the draft Law on Inspection (amended), focusing on enhancing accountability and efficiency within inspection agencies. This session, part of the ongoing Ninth Session, saw significant contributions from various deputies regarding the proposed changes to the legal framework governing inspections in Vietnam.
Deputy Lò Thị Luyến from Điện Biên raised a critical point regarding Article 24 of the draft law, which stipulates penalties for inspectors who fail to complete their tasks or intentionally overlook violations. She suggested removing the term "intentionally" from this article, arguing that proving intent in such cases is challenging and could lead to legal loopholes or disputes during accountability processes. Luyến emphasized that the existing language complicates accountability and could undermine the seriousness of legal violations.
In her view, the focus should be on the outcomes of inspections rather than the intent behind potential oversights. "We should replace the term 'mistake' with 'violation' to accurately reflect the nature of the actions that can lead to serious consequences," Luyến proposed, highlighting the need for clarity and rigor in legal terminology.
Deputy Nguyễn Thanh Phương from Cần Thơ supported the notion of unscheduled inspections but called for clearer regulations regarding the frequency of scheduled inspections. He expressed concern that without defined cycles, agencies might face undue pressure from frequent inspections, which could hamper their operational effectiveness. “How often should inspections occur? We need to ensure that inspection teams are not overburdened,” he stated, pointing out the necessity for a structured approach to inspection timelines.
Phương also questioned the need for additional oversight of inspection teams, suggesting that the focus should be on selecting inspectors with the right qualifications and ethical standards. He commented on the importance of trust in the inspection process, stating, “When forming inspection teams, we must ensure that we choose individuals who are competent and possess integrity.”
Moreover, Phương voiced his opposition to a provision that would allow inspection agencies to retain a portion of recovered funds to enhance their operational capabilities. He argued that the state should provide adequate resources for inspectors to perform their duties effectively, rather than relying on funds recovered from inspections. “Inspection is a challenging task, and inspectors deserve proper compensation and resources to carry out their work efficiently,” he concluded.
Deputy Đào Chí Nghĩa, also from Cần Thơ, echoed the need for clarity in the draft law, particularly regarding the coordination mechanisms between the Government Inspectorate and various ministries. He emphasized that the proposed expansion of tasks and powers for the Government Inspectorate and provincial inspectorates necessitates substantial adjustments in organizational structure, staffing, and resources. “We need a clear roadmap for these changes to ensure that inspection activities remain uninterrupted and effective,” Nghĩa urged.
Nghĩa further proposed adding specific measures to ensure the implementation of inspection conclusions, noting that there have been instances where clear findings from inspections were not acted upon promptly. “It’s critical that we enforce timely action on inspection findings to prevent delays in addressing violations,” he stressed, suggesting that the draft law should explicitly outline the responsibilities of authorities in executing inspection decisions.
Deputy Lò Thị Luyến reiterated her concerns about the difficulties in proving intentional misconduct by inspectors. She pointed out that the draft law's language could deter inspectors from performing their duties due to fear of unwarranted penalties. “We must find a balance that holds inspectors accountable without creating an environment of fear that might hinder their effectiveness,” she remarked.
As discussions progressed, the assembly also touched upon the legal framework surrounding the re-inspection process. The draft law allows for re-inspections if there are mistakes in the application of law in previous inspections. However, the deputies noted that the criteria for what constitutes a mistake need to be clearly defined to avoid ambiguity and ensure that the re-inspection process is both fair and effective.
During the session, it was highlighted that the National Assembly would also review other related laws, including the Law on Cadres and Civil Servants, the Law on Youth, and the Law on Science and Technology. Deputy Nghĩa urged the drafting committee to carefully examine these laws to eliminate any overlapping regulations that could complicate the inspection process.
The assembly's discussions reflect a growing recognition of the need for a robust legal framework that enhances the efficiency and accountability of inspection agencies. As the draft Law on Inspection (amended) moves forward, the input from these deputies will be crucial in shaping a legal structure that not only addresses current shortcomings but also lays the groundwork for improved governance and public trust in inspection processes.
In conclusion, the ongoing discussions in the National Assembly underscore the importance of refining the legal provisions governing inspections to ensure they are effective, transparent, and fair. The amendments proposed by the deputies aim to enhance the accountability of inspectors while also providing them with the necessary support to perform their duties effectively.
