Companies more frequently send constructive ideas to the compilation of legal documents, especially before any plenary meeting of the National Assembly. However, the compilation of a legal document, especially related to enterprises, has not reached the inherent nature.
In fact, the current process of building legal documents is mainly based on subjective wills and provisions and clauses usually benefit State management organisations. Although various struggles have narrowed the gap between lawmakers and the practicality, the old thought remains deeply rooted. Only when the Government and State agencies asked issues related business matters, enterprises or business associations showed their ideas. Hardly have enterprises ever sent ideas to State agencies for the compilation of legal documents. When there is a problem, enterprises find hard to seek sharing from the State agencies.
Mr Hoang Van Dung, Vice Chairman of Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VCCI), explained that “The State intrinsically has the “bureaucratic” nature even when it is an advanced and developed state. State agencies are bound not only by the practical sensitiveness but also by the thought of defence of “gatekeepers” which always wants an absolute safety for them. Besides, the construction of legal policies is affected by the subjective prism of lawmakers.” Dung said there is no exception for intentions for local benefits. So, the participation of the business community will ensure the objective idea contribution.
A VCCI report said several legal documents were made by only State agencies. The discussions with business representatives had little impacts on the modification.
For example, when the Vietnam Steel Association took part in the building of “Steel trading regulation” in 2004, steelmakers still had disagreements. Each of the four-time sending of the draft by the Ministry of Trade, the Vietnam Steel Association gathered directors of its member companies to collect ideas or sent written requests for idea contributions to the draft. However, the lawmaker did not fully acquire the constructive ideas and the association had to ask lawyers and law consultants for accurate instructions.
Professor John Gillespie, Director of Asian Business Law Construction Workgroup under the Law Faculty of Monash University (Australia), the first reason for the disagreement among policymakers of business issues is the absence of idea contributions of enterprises, especially small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Professor John Gillespie thought that the time for the consultation with enterprises was normally too short. In some countries, the consultation time usually lasts from one to three months. In Vietnam, the consultation is only for documents considered having large-scaled effects, not small-scaled ones. Second, SMEs lack opportunities to have direct talks with policymakers and lawmakers. Third, many SMEs lack resources and professional knowledge to contribute ideas to the construction of legal documents. Fourth, lawmakers and SMEs do not have the same understanding of the nature of the law. While lawmakers are concerned about how to conform the local laws to international agreements like BTA and WTO, SMEs prefer more Vietnamese-styled laws.
As a representative for enterprises, Mr Dung pointed out that after 20 years of doi moi (renovation) the most widely applied laws are those received the most contributions from the business community. The ideas given by the business community is so plentiful that lawmakers have never encountered many of them.
Huyen Nhi
Vietnamese
