Decree No. 109/2026/ND-CP (Decree 109), scheduled to take effect on May 18, 2026, has introduced notable supplementary regulations regarding administrative sanctions in the field of judicial support, specifically concerning the practice of law.
Concerns rise as local officials gain power to suspend lawyer licenses
A newly emerging issue that is receiving considerable attention is the empowerment of chairpersons of people's committees in communes to impose penalties on legal practitioners. This authority encompasses the additional measure of revoking the right to utilize a lawyer practicing certificate or a foreign lawyer license in Vietnam for a fix period.
Alarmingly, this power is not confined solely to commune chairpersons; it also extends to chiefs of police forces in communes, heads of police forces in provinces, directors of police departments in provinces, and numerous other entities that are now granted the authority to suspend practicing licenses and certificates for a specified duration.
While it is essential to enhance tools for addressing violations to uphold order in professional activities, these regulations should be approached with caution within the distinct context of the legal profession, a field inherently associated with the right to defense, the safeguarding of the legal rights of individuals and organizations, and the role of social critique.
In practice, lawyers frequently defend clients in cases where interests directly conflict with state agencies, such as administrative lawsuits, land disputes, or compensation for site clearance. These are areas where local governments, including people's committees in communes, are often directly or indirectly involved as an interested party.
Granting a commune chairperson the authority to impose sanctions or even revoke a lawyer’s practicing certificate raises concerns about a conflict of interest. It effectively places the official in the position of both regulator and interested party: an authority that could be subject to legal challenge or criticism would also hold the power to penalize the lawyer bringing that challenge.
The 2013 Constitution of Vietnam stipulates that human and civil rights may only be restricted in accordance with the law in necessary cases (Article 14). Citizens have the right to work and choose their profession (Article 35). Regarding the right to practice law, the Law on Lawyers defines the social function of a lawyer as contributing to the protection of justice, civil liberties, and the legal interests of individuals and organizations (Article 3).
However, under Article 84 of Decree 109, authorities in communes are empowered to suspend a lawyer’s practice. Viewed objectively, this provision does not automatically lead to abuses of power in practice. Nonetheless, from an institutional design perspective, it remains a sensitive point that warrants strict oversight. The mere existence of such authority may exert a subtle influence, potentially leading lawyers to adopt an overly cautious approach, thereby affecting the quality of legal representation for their clients.
Expansion must come with control
Another notable issue is the compatibility between the new provisions in Decree 109/2026/ND-CP and existing laws, specifically the 2006 Law on Lawyers (amended 2012) and the 2012 Law on Handling of Administrative Violations (amended 2025).
Under the Law on Lawyers, the issuance and revocation of practicing certificates fall under the authority of the Ministry of Justice, while management and discipline are handled by socio-professional organizations (Bar Associations and the Vietnam Bar Federation) through a rigorous multi-level process. This mechanism is designed to ensure professional independence while maintaining discipline and ethics.
Conversely, Decree 109 introduces an administrative sanction mechanism that allows multiple entities, including those at the commune level, to strip the right to use certificates. This raises questions about potential overlaps between the two systems.
In principle, administrative sanctions and professional discipline can coexist as they serve different objectives. However, the boundaries between these mechanisms must be clearly defined to avoid "double jeopardy" or inconsistent application. Notably, the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations does not explicitly delegate the authority to strip lawyer certificates to people's committees in communes.
Moreover, the hierarchy of legal instruments requires clarification. A conflict arises when a decree permits a commune chairperson to revoke a practicing certificate, while the Law on Lawyers reserves that authority for the Ministry of Justice.
One interpretation holds that the measures set out in Decree 109 constitute temporary administrative suspensions for specific violations, while permanent revocation or professional discipline remains governed by the Law on Lawyers. For such an interpretation to be applied consistently, however, detailed guidance from competent authorities is essential.
Strengthening state management in judicial support is clearly necessary. Yet because the legal profession is a cornerstone of a rule-of-law system, safeguarding professional independence must remain paramount.
An effective legal system is not defined by the breadth of its punitive powers, but by its ability to restrain them in order to protect fundamental values, namely, a lawyer’s right to practice lawfully and a citizen’s right to access justice.
