Dec 18, 2022

Constitutional Rights in a State of Emergency: The Case of Vietnam 

Written by: Alexandra MorkAbigail Hassan

In March 2020, COVID-19 was officially declared a pandemic; as the medical community worked to find a vaccine, the information world was rampant with misinformation. The Vietnamese government implemented a state of emergency and began cracking down on misinformation.

During this time of uncertainty, citizens relied on social media to stay informed and express their thoughts on the current state. Facebook user Nguyen Van Dung was fined VND 10 million (approx. USD 430) for stating in a post that Ho Chi Minh City would be “locked down” for 14 days starting March 28th, 2020. There is no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic constitutes an emergency with dire consequences for the right to health and other rights; preventing and addressing these consequences requires robust protective action from the government, which has obligations to protect and fulfill all rights. Among these rights is the right to free speech and access to information; the measures by which the government suppresses these rights in times of crisis are vital to the strength of democracy.  

The essential prerequisites to establish democracy do not exist in Vietnam. However, Vietnam is not a democratic government; they publicly claim to have a representative government with leaders who speak for the people. However, there is a slight separation between the party and the government. Although the president and the National assembly enforce laws and carry out government matters, the communist party has a substantial influence in setting the priorities for the state. Despite Vietnam having a democratic constitution, citizens are not granted the rights given to them by the constitution. Opposition candidates are swiftly eliminated and often imprisoned; this indicates the erosion of what little democratic principles remained in Vietnam. 

Vietnam’s history is riddled with turmoil, creating an environment that does not foster democracy. The land now known as Vietnam was a part of Indochina, a French territory. After nearly three decades under French rule, Vietnam was split into two states; North Vietnam and South Vietnam. This divide caused tension between the two regions, leading to the Vietnam War two years later. After Vietnam was split into two, the leader of North Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh, wished to create a unified communist regime by invading South Vietnam. He modeled this regime after those in China and the Soviet Union. South Vietnam adopted a democratic republic form of governance. Ultimately South Vietnam fell, and Ho Chi Minh created a unified communist state. The United States tried to prevent Vietnam from becoming a communist state, resulting in the death of millions and catastrophic loss for all involved. The eventual American withdrawal and transition into communism made clear that this endeavor was unsuccessful.   

In theory, Vietnamese citizens have rights, but their rights are tightly restricted in practice. Freedom of expression, civil society activism, and religious freedom are most restricted. COVID-19 has enabled the government to crack down on any information that does not align with their beliefs, resulting in government control over social media platforms. 

Works Cited 

  1. “Censorship Tactics Overshadow Vietnam’s Successful COVID-19 Response.” Global Voices Advox, June 10th, 2020, https://advox.globalvoices.org/2020/06/10/censorship-tactics-overshadow-vietnams-successful-covid-19-response/.
  2. Chung, Dr. Pham Hai, and Dr. Ngo Minh Huong. Digital Rights in State of Emergency in Vietnam during Covid 19 … https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/3402195/Pham-Hai-Chong_Ngo-Minh-Huong_Paper.pdf.
  3. “Covid-19 Triggers Wave of Free Speech Abuse.” Human Rights Watch, March 29th, 2021, https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/11/covid-19-triggers-wave-free-speech-abuse.
  4. Herrero-Arias R, Truong AN, Ortiz-Barreda G, Briones-Vozmediano E. Keeping silent or running away. The voices of Vietnamese women survivors of Intimate Partner Violence. Glob Health Action. 2021 Jan 1;14(1):1863128. Doi: 10.1080/16549716.2020.1863128. PMID: 33380282; PMCID: PMC7781891.
  5. “Independent Report on ‘Meta’s Human Rights Impact in Israel and Palestine’ in May 2021 Released.” Lawfare, September 22nd, 2022, https://www.lawfareblog.com/independent-report-metas-human-rights-impact-israel-and-palestine-may-2021-released.
  6. “International Commission of Jurists.” Www.icj.org/Commission, International Commission of Jurists, https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vietnam-Freedom-of-expression-Publications-reports-thematic-reports-2020-ENG.pdf. 
  7. Kerkvliet, Benedict J. Speaking out in Vietnam: Public Political Criticism in a Communist Party-Ruled Nation. Cornell University Press, 2019.
  8. McCauley, Brian, et al. “Facebook in Vietnam: Uses, Gratifications & Narcissism.” Open Journal of Social Sciences, Scientific Research Publishing, November 25th, 2016, https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=72343.
  9. Smith, Craig R. “Silencing the Opposition: How the U.S. Government Suppressed Freedom of Expression during Major Crises.” Choice Reviews Online, vol. 49, no. 02, 2011, https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-1078.
  10. Tran, Richard Quang-Anh. “Banishing the Poets: Reflections on Free Speech and Literary Censorship in Vietnam.” Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol. 48, no. 4, 2022, pp. 603–618. https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537211073626.
  11. “Vietnam: Freedom on the Net 2022 Country Report.” Freedom House, https://freedomhouse.org/country/vietnam/freedom-net/2022.
  12. “World Report 2022: Rights Trends in Vietnam.” Human Rights Watch, March 15th, 2022, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/vietnam#f81d60. 

Sign Up For Updates

Get the latest updates, research, teaching opportunities, and event information from the Democratic Erosion Consortium by signing up for our listserv.

Popular Tags

Popular Categories

1 Comment

  1. Maya Stitzlein

    I liked how you connected the rights of free speech to this very current issue that the world is facing. Information about public health is especially important when dealing with such a transmissible virus. However, I will argue that in this case at least, free speech does not equal freedom from consequences. From my understanding, Nguyen Van Dung accidentally spread misinformation. Because of his carelessness, the false information in his post began to spread, and the government had to address the rumors to stop it from going further. When people promote information that concerns such a vast public without fact -checking it (whether intentional or not), they should be punished to dissuade others from doing the same (especially those with malicious intent). Too much free speech protection, as Huq and Ginsburg argue, allows for the propagation of misinformation.

    That being said, I do agree that in general, Vietnam needs to be better. Perhaps greater polarization can help increase the practice of allowing Vietnam citizens to exercise their rights. As LeBas proposed, one benefit of polarization is that it can lead to decentralized power and improved accountability, partially because those currently in power are afraid to lose it and therefore feel more pressure to conform to democratic practices. Hopefully, greater polarization could lead to more horizontal and vertical accountability within the government.

    Sources:

    Thang, Quoc. “Saigon man fined for spreading lockdown fake news.”

    Huq, Aziz and Ginsburg, Tom. “How to Lose a Constitutional Democracy.”

    LeBas, Adrienne. “Can Polarization Be Positive? Conflict and Institutional Development in Africa.”

Submit a Comment