A new legal proposal could soon allow suspects in Việt Nam to receive leniency and fast-track trials in exchange for voluntarily pleading guilty.
The Latest: On July 15, the Supreme People’s Procuracy (SPP) published the draft amended Criminal Procedure Code for public comment through Aug. 4, 2026.
- The draft proposes a mechanism for voluntary guilty pleas and the acceptance of punishment.
Under Article 20 of the draft, when an accused person voluntarily pleads guilty and accepts punishment, simplified procedures may be applied, and the person may receive leniency as prescribed.
The SPP said that the new provision aims to “ensure harmony between the need to handle crimes quickly and effectively, the protection of human rights, and the implementation of the state’s policy of leniency.”
The Details: Under Clause 2, Article 443 of the draft, suspects or defendants must meet the following conditions to be eligible for simplified procedures during investigation, prosecution, or first-instance trial:
- (i) They voluntarily plead guilty, accept punishment and judicial measures, and voluntarily remedy consequences and compensate for damage
- (ii) A record of this is made, with defense counsel participating in the record-making process
- (iii) There is sufficient evidence proving the crime, and the confession is consistent with other evidence in the case
- (iv) The offense is not especially serious, except for crimes involving economic management order, corruption, or official misconduct
- (v) The case, if handled, does not affect national security, politics, or foreign affairs
Article 81 provides that if “suspects or defendants subject to simplified procedures after voluntarily pleading guilty” do not hire defense counsel, one must be appointed for them.
- Meanwhile, Article 82 states that suspects and defendants in such cases have only the right to request a change of defense counsel, not the right to refuse one.
Article 445 requires defense counsel to participate in the record-making process for voluntary guilty pleas at all procedural stages, and the process must be audio-recorded or video-recorded with sound.
Articles 448, 449, and 451 also regulate voluntary guilty pleas at specific stages, from investigation and prosecution to first-instance trial.
To prevent abuse, Clause 2, Article 442 of the draft clearly states:
“The accused person’s confession does not replace the obligation of competent procedural authorities to prove the crime and may not be considered the sole evidence for conviction.”
The draft amended Criminal Procedure Code is expected to be submitted to the 16th National Assembly for passage at its second session in October 2026.
Expert’s View: Speaking to Luật Khoa Magazine, an anonymous legal expert (whose name remains confidential for security reasons) said that “the draft Criminal Procedure Code’s addition of a voluntary guilty plea mechanism is a notable step forward in the process of criminal justice reform, reflecting a move closer to modern procedural models around the world.”
- The expert also noted that if designed properly, it could shorten case-resolution time, reduce procedural costs, save state resources, encourage proactive remediation, better protect victims’ rights, and improve judgment enforcement.
However, the expert warned of significant risks, primarily that accused people might plead guilty because they fear a harsher sentence rather than because they are actually culpable. Elaborating on this, the expert added:
“If accused people see that pleading guilty is always tied to a lighter sentence, but there are no clear legal standards to control the process, it can easily create the perception that punishment is the result of negotiation rather than a decision based on evidence and law.”
On the issue of possible corruption and misconduct, the expert stated:
“Next, there is the risk of corruption and misconduct, which could lead to the formation of a ‘crony’ network specializing in ‘voluntary’ guilty plea cases. Without a transparent oversight mechanism, the practice could become a form of collusion and profit-sharing among the quartet of police, lawyers, prosecutors, and courts.”
Regarding the burden of proof, the expert noted:
“I appreciate that the draft retains a critical principle: a confession does not replace the burden of proof held by procedural authorities and may not be treated as the sole evidence for conviction. This is a core principle for preventing wrongful convictions. However, this principle only has real meaning if it is accompanied by transparent and effective control mechanisms during implementation.”
When asked about the role of lawyers, the expert asserted that they are “the most important protective institution to ensure that it operates for its intended purpose.” The expert stressed:
“The role of lawyers should not stop at witnessing the accused person sign a record. Lawyers must have the opportunity to meet privately with their clients before they decide to plead guilty and must fully explain their rights, obligations, legal consequences, and the advantages and disadvantages of choosing simplified procedures. Only when accused people fully understand and make the decision themselves can it be considered voluntary in the legal sense.
In addition, lawyers need the right to object to the use of simplified procedures if there are grounds to believe that the guilty plea does not come from free will or that there is not yet sufficient objective evidence.
Lawyers’ opinions must be fully recorded in the minutes and considered by the court when deciding whether to accept the use of this mechanism.”
The expert added:
“I also think the draft is moving in the right direction by requiring defense counsel to participate in the making of guilty plea records. However, for this mechanism to be truly effective, it must continue to guarantee access to case files, the right to meet privately with clients, and the right to participate from the earliest stage of recording the guilty plea. Then, lawyers are not only protecting their clients’ rights but also helping ensure the legality, objectivity, and fairness of the entire proceedings.”
The Background: While the draft Criminal Procedure Code does not use the term “plea bargaining” or “plea agreement,” the legal expert noted that it creates a mechanism for it.
- Plea bargaining or a plea agreement is a procedural mechanism used in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and several European countries, where a suspect or defendant may voluntarily plead guilty in exchange for reduced charges, a lighter sentence, or certain procedural benefits.
- However, a guilty plea must be voluntary, made with legal counsel, and reviewed by a court to prevent coerced confessions, forced testimony, or wrongful convictions.
In Việt Nam, the voluntariness of statements and the presumption of innocence are highly controversial due to numerous wrongful conviction cases where suspects were allegedly coerced, tortured, or forced to confess. Notable examples include:
- The case of Nguyễn Thanh Chấn in Bắc Giang (2003-2013)
- The case of Huỳnh Văn Nén in Bình Thuận (1998-2015)
- The wrongful arrest of seven young men in Sóc Trăng in a murder case (2013-2014)
- The case of Ngô Thanh Kiều, who died during interrogation in Phú Yên in 2012.
Additionally, letters from death row prisoner Nguyễn Văn Chưởng in Hải Dương alleged coerced testimony and torture during the investigation process.
The practice of televised confessions—where suspects admit wrongdoing before a trial—has also drawn scrutiny.
- In 2009, Atty. Lê Công Định and co-defendants confessed on television; after his release, Định told the BBC he had been forced to do so.
- In 2020, Lê Đình Công admitted his “wrongful actions” on television regarding the Đồng Tâm case.
- More recently, Đỗ Văn Ngà confessed on VTV before his first-instance trial in 2025 in the Lê Trung Khoa case.
- Nguyễn Thành Nam and Trần Việt Anh pleaded guilty and apologized on VTV in the summer of 2026 for the “Chuyện với Thanh” case.
Why It Matters: The voluntary guilty plea mechanism represents an entirely new institution in Vietnamese criminal law.
- Currently, the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code contain no provisions allowing an accused person who voluntarily pleads guilty and accepts punishment to receive simplified procedures and leniency.
- Under the current framework, Article 51 of the Penal Code only provides mitigating circumstances for offenders, such as “sincerely declaring and showing remorse” and “actively cooperating with competent agencies in detecting crimes or during case resolution.”
Lê Sáng wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on July 30, 2026. The Vietnamese Magazine has the copyrights to the English translation.
