Ministry of Justice Mandates Lawyers be ‘Politically Loyal and Professionally Competent’

Recently, Việt Nam’s legal community has been resonant with a debate over whether lawyers should wear formal robes in court. [1] While some argue that the proposal would enhance the solemnity and standing of the profession [2], others dismiss the attire as merely symbolic or inappropriate. [3] [4] At the same time, the proposal has become a source of humor across social media platforms. [5]

What is truly notable, however, is that while public discourse fixates on courtroom fashion, a separate and far more consequential change has emerged: a proposed requirement that lawyers possess “firm political steadfastness.”

At present, the law does not impose such an ideological mandate. Article 10 of the current Law on Lawyers sets out standard professional criteria, including qualifications, ethical standards, health, training, and apprenticeships. [6] There is no provision requiring lawyers to adhere to any specific political viewpoint. 

However, according to the draft dossier for the amended Law on Lawyers currently being prepared by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), Vietnamese lawyers would need to meet this new standard of “firm political steadfastness.” [7] [8] 

This proposal follows the directives that Resolution No. 27/2022 of the Central Committee of the Communist Party set out. [9]

The MOJ’s submission explains that “firm political steadfastness” means “having a correct understanding of the political system and always maintaining awareness and responsibility to protect justice, and the rights and interests of the nation and the people.” [10] 

This standard would be embedded throughout a lawyer’s entire career, from initial training and practicing certificate examinations to mandatory ongoing ideological training sessions. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Those deemed lacking could have their practicing certificates revoked. Yet, what constitutes a “correct understanding” or the “interests of the nation and the people” remains ambiguous and completely subject to the determination of state authorities.

In Việt Nam, the concept of “political steadfastness” is not new; it has long been used to assess civil servants, party members, and members of the National Assembly. [11] 

Authorities and state media typically define it as loyalty to the ideals of the Communist Party, Marxism–Leninism, and Hồ Chí Minh Thought, as well as a duty to refute the “incorrect viewpoints” of hostile or reactionary forces. [12] If imposed on lawyers, the line between “defending justice” and “defending the regime” risks becoming hopelessly blurred.

This directly contradicts the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct for Vietnamese lawyers, which does not mention “political steadfastness” at all. [13] Instead, the code mandates that lawyers remain “independent, honest, and respectful of objective truth,” forbidding them from allowing external pressures to compromise their professional ethics. 

In democratic nations, lawyers are only expected to follow the law and the truth—a principle tracing back to ancient Greece, where advocates swore to “represent the naked truth, without embellishment, without ornament, without resorting to tricks to sway the judge’s emotions.” [14]

In Việt Nam, however, lawyers may soon be required to pledge loyalty to the Communist Party and the socialist system above objective truth. Under such an interpretation, lawyers like Trần Đình Triển, who was convicted for writings critical of party and state leaders, could easily be deemed lacking in “political steadfastness” and deemed unfit to practice. [15]

While lawyers certainly require resilience, it should be the courage to fight for justice, their clients, and the truth, rather than political steadfastness in service of a ruling party. If a fixed political ideology confines legal professionals, it will shatter their independence. They cannot be expected to speak truths that others might view as distorting that ideology. 

If this proposal is adopted, lawyers risk losing their independence—the very foundation of their profession.

Trường An wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on April 14, 2026. Đàm Vĩnh Hằng translated it into English for The Vietnamese Magazine.