Inside the Elections for Việt Nam’s National Assembly: The Three Mandatory Vetting Rounds 

​A party membership card is not a strict requirement to enter politics in Việt Nam. According to the law, any Vietnamese citizen aged 21 or older is permitted to run for the National Assembly, the highest state authority. On paper, it seems straightforward for eligible individuals to submit an application and become a candidate.

​However, the transition from an ordinary citizen to occupying one of the up to 500 seats in the National Assembly chamber requires far more than simply “submitting an application and waiting for the day of the session.”

​A candidate must survive three rounds of vetting. While formally presented as a democratic method to select qualified individuals, this filtering process functions in practice as the mechanism the Communist Party of Vietnam uses to decide who advances and who is stopped at the very first layer of the filter. [1]

​For those who still believe a narrow opening exists for non-party members, it is worth examining each vetting round to understand what actually happens behind the scenes.

Round 1: A Room with No Open Chairs

Imagine walking into a meeting room only to discover that every seat is already assigned. These seats are not allocated randomly but rather divided according to a predetermined “structure.”

This framework dictates the exact number of men and women, ethnic minorities, central and local representatives, and, crucially, non-party members permitted to participate.

​Before a candidate even steps into the room, the number of seats suitable for their “group” is already decided.

​On paper, the National Assembly presents this round as a discussion to ensure a balanced demographic composition. In reality, it is the moment the system determines the assembly’s exact layout for the year, deciding who has a realistic chance of entry and who is effectively barred from the start.

​This vetting round is chaired by the Vietnam Fatherland Front. While many public observers view the Front as a fair referee standing between the state and the citizens, it is fundamentally a part of the party system and operates under its direct guidance.

​For anyone considering self-nomination, the first critical step is understanding whether the system has left any space for them. Although it sounds contrary to the spirit of free elections, this is the reality of the process.

Because the quota for non-party candidates is kept exceptionally low, even an outstanding candidate must squeeze through an extremely narrow door. [2]

Ultimately, candidates are not merely competing against others; they are fighting against a rigid structural framework placed right in front of them.

Round 2: The Importance of Affiliation

​Even if a candidate is fortunate enough to squeeze through the structural framework of the first round, the second round presents equal, if not greater, challenges.

​Upon formally submitting an application to become an official candidate, the path chosen—running independently versus being nominated by an organization—significantly shapes the odds of success.

​For those nominated by an agency or organization, the file undergoes an initial review by the party organization at their workplace. This serves as a “political health check” where evaluators determine suitability.

This suitability could refer to job qualifications, alignment with current systemic operations, or adherence to unwritten but widely understood criteria.

​Conversely, independent candidates enter the race without organizational backing, subjecting their files to far stricter scrutiny. Their background, profession, relationships, acquaintances, and overall community perception all become critical evaluation factors.

​An important step in this second round involves gathering feedback from the candidate’s local residence. During a designated meeting, neighbors, local representatives, and mass organization members publicly comment on the individual.

While this session can be an opportunity to demonstrate community trust, it frequently devolves into a setting where personal prejudices or minor grievances result in a damaging official conclusion: that the candidate “does not have the community’s confidence.”

Round 3: The Final List

Reaching the third round indicates that a candidate has successfully navigated three demanding hurdles: the structural quotas of the first round, the organizational screening of the second, and the community vetting at their local residence.

​However, passing these stages does not guarantee a secured position. The third round serves as the definitive stage where the final determination is made regarding ballot access.

​During this phase, the Việt Nam Fatherland Front convenes a concluding meeting to review all dossiers. A candidate can still be eliminated without having committed any infractions.

Detailed reasons for disqualification are rarely provided, yet the decision is absolute and ends all participation in the electoral race.

​This third round generates the official candidate list, which is the only roster presented to voters. Appearing on this list signifies that a candidate has survived the most rigorous obstacle: the point at which the system dictates who is permitted to face the electorate.

​Elimination prior to this stage is not necessarily a reflection of a candidate’s capability or dedication. Rather, it underscores that the electoral process relies on an exceptionally narrow door, with the keys firmly controlled by its architects.

Prioritizing the Central Leadership

​An examination of the three vetting rounds reveals a clear, unwritten rule: National Assembly seats for members of the Communist Party’s Central Committee are practically guaranteed.

​As the political backbone of the system, this elite group benefits from the very first stage. When the Việt Nam Fatherland Front allocates structural quotas, specific seats are inherently reserved for leaders of ministries, provinces, and the armed forces.

​Because Central Committee members hold the vast majority of these senior positions, this allocation forms a natural protective barrier that ensures their legislative presence.

This pattern only solidifies during the second and third rounds. As ministries and agencies submit their candidate lists, the dossiers of Central Committee members are automatically deemed to meet the required standards. Having already survived multiple layers of political vetting to reach their senior ranks, they are rarely eliminated.

​While independent candidates and outsiders face exhaustive evaluations and structural hurdles, Central Committee candidates navigate the process with relative ease.

For this reason, the final confirmed list of National Assembly delegates consistently reflects a familiar reality: although many delegates are not in the Central Committee, nearly every Central Committee member secures a seat. This outcome is easily observable in every election cycle and is a deliberate design of the vetting process.

***

​On election day, voters go to the polls believing that casting their ballot is the definitive moment for choosing their representatives. However, any candidate quickly realizes that the true decisions were finalized long before, during the three vetting rounds.

​Because the final candidate list is meticulously curated to guarantee systemic stability, officially nominated candidates typically secure victory with exceptionally high vote shares.

​Ultimately, securing a seat in the National Assembly requires prior approval from the party. It is an exceedingly rare occurrence for self-nominated candidates to even reach the final consultative round.

---

Thúc Kháng wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on March 2, 2026. Đàm Vĩnh Hằng translated it into English for The Vietnamese Magazine.