The Gap Between Việt Nam’s Fair Trial Promises And Its Death Sentences

September 22, 2026, marked the third anniversary of Lê Văn Mạnh’s wrongful execution in Việt Nam. Despite his family’s persistent claims of his innocence, the state executed him after a fundamentally flawed legal process. Yet his case was not an exception to the rules; it merely illuminates what has become systematic in Việt Nam’s death penalty jurisprudence.

As an advocate for abolishing the death penalty and exonerating wrongfully convicted prisoners, I confront a single question repeatedly: How do I know these inmates are innocent? My answer is straightforward. Any defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In Mạnh’s case—and in others—the state never met that threshold. It failed to present evidence adequate to sustain a capital conviction.

Lê Văn Mạnh and other wrongful death penalty inmates, such as Hồ Duy Hải or Nguyễn Văn Chưởng, are innocent because the state could not sufficiently prove that they committed the crime. Unfortunately, the presumption of innocence is only a legal concept in Việt Nam, and society and the courts may not take it seriously.

Innocent people can be deemed guilty by the public the moment  police charge them with a crime—sometimes even sentenced to death and executed like Mạnh, when the prosecution fails to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the reality of Việt Nam’s legal system, and it must be reformed to stop killing innocent people.

The Case against Lê Văn Mạnh

Let’s go back to the case of Lê Văn Mạnh. In 2005, following a girl’s rape and death in his home province, Thanh Hóa, Lê Văn Mạnh was prosecuted and sentenced to death. The evidence that was used to convict Mạnh that year was extremely thin, hardly providing any physical evidence to prove a rape and murder. The evidence against him only included a pair of shorts identified as his and a letter from him to his father confessing to the crime.

The evidence from the prosecution was fiercely disputed. Mạnh said he had discarded the shorts during one of the trips he was helping in search of the missing girl. He retracted his confession, which was stated in a letter sent to his father, alleging that investigators and fellow prisoners had beaten him and forced him to write a confession.

Between 2005 and 2008, multiple trials and appeals followed. In 2007, the Supreme People’s Procuracy identified investigative errors and contradictions, questioning whether the evidence adequately supported the charges. Nevertheless, the death sentence was upheld in 2008.

In October 2015, the state notified his family that it would execute him, and his parents, lawyers, and international organizations fought to stop it. The execution was halted.

In the seven years from 2015 to 2022, his family, lawyers, and international organizations sought a reprieve and investigation into the coercion allegations. The authorities postponed the execution and reviewed the case. However, in September 2023, his family received another execution notice.

Mạnh was executed on September 22, 2023, after more than 18 years protesting his innocence. 

Based on Việt Nam’s law books, a confession may not be the only evidence to convict a defendant. Then, how could a coerced confession, along with a pair of shorts, be the proof to take Lê Văn Mạnh’s life? 

Adequate Evidence in Capital Cases

Under both Việt Nam law and international standards, a death sentence requires far more than a defendant’s confession. Article 13 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code establishes that an accused person is deemed innocent until guilt is proven according to the procedures and formalities defined in law, and a court passes a valid conviction. If grounds for conviction are insufficient, competent procedural authorities shall conclude that the person is innocent.

Importantly, confessions alone cannot sustain a conviction. Vietnamese law specifies that a confession of an accused person shall not be used as the sole basis for a conviction. Necessary evidence other than the confession must be investigated to see if the confession is consistent with the facts. Under UN safeguards protecting those facing the death penalty, this punishment can only be imposed based upon clear and convincing evidence, leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts. 

Furthermore, Article 15 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code places the burden to prove offenses on competent procedural authorities. The accused has the right, but no obligation, to prove his or her innocence. This is not merely legal formalism; it is the foundation of due process. The UN Human Rights Committee has articulated this principle with clarity: violations of fair trial guarantees in proceedings resulting in death sentences render such sentences arbitrary and violate the right to life itself under international law.

In the end, Mạnh was executed despite international concerns raised about his case. On October 2, 2023, Morris Tidball-Binz, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions, issued a formal statement:

“I am disturbed by the execution of Lê Văn Mạnh despite calls for clemency, in light of serious doubts about the fairness of his trial proceedings and credible allegations of torture or ill-treatment to extract a confession. Under international human rights law, any statement that is proven to have been made as a result of torture should not be used as evidence in any proceedings.”

Mạnh’s Petition to be Executed in September 2014

Although the international community was outraged over his death, few people knew that Mạnh had pleaded with the state to kill him more than 10 years before his execution. In September 2014, Mạnh wrote to the then president of Việt Nam, Trương Tấn Sang, asking the authorities to carry out his execution. While asking for death, Mạnh’s petition again raised the injustice he suffered and his wrongful conviction.

Mạnh summarized his case:

“I was wrongfully arrested on charges of rape and murder. My case has gone through three first-instance trials, three appeals, and one cassation review that overturned the judgments. Another request I submitted for cassation review was rejected. I have sent numerous petitions asserting my innocence to the competent legal authorities, as well as many petitions to you, Mr. President. I have also applied for a retrial, but several years have passed without any news.

Mr. President, I committed no crime, yet I have endured this injustice for nearly 10 years.

Yes, Mr. President, it has been a long, very long ordeal, and my entire family has suffered the anguish caused by this miscarriage of justice.”

Death row inmates in Việt Nam are being held in solitary confinement. By the date of his execution, September 22, 2023, Lê Văn Mạnh was in solitary confinement for 18 years. 

Detailing physical and psychological injuries he suffered because of this confinement, he stated:

“For 3,433 days and nights, I have suffered torment in body and soul, held in solitary confinement and shackled around the clock. My body aches day and night, beyond what I can bear. Human endurance has its limits, and today this anguish, this pain, has exceeded those limits. Even iron and steel will bend and break under relentless pressure—how much more so a human being of flesh and blood? This injustice has now left my family shattered, with nothing remaining.”

If one does not understand why he was asking the state to execute him, then what he wrote about his family and children may be the answer:

“My family was already poor, yet they have had to support me here in prison. They now face extreme hardship. It pains me beyond words to know that my parents, who brought me into this world, my younger siblings, and my children must live each day hungry and in rags, all because of the injustice done to me.

Mr. President, what human being does not want to live? Even dogs and cats want to live, so how could I, a human being, wish otherwise? Yet today I must write this petition to you, respectfully asking you to allow me to die. From these words, you can see how terrible the suffering caused by this miscarriage of justice has been.”

***

Lê Văn Mạnh was not executed because the evidence against him was compelling. He was executed because the system chose not to question its verdict, even as every legal and human principle demanded it. This case is a stark reflection of the death penalty in Việt Nam, where innocent people are sentenced to death and get executed over a pair of shorts and a coerced confession like Mạnh’s. 

Việt Nam continues to keep the death penalty. Yet at the same time, it fails to follow  its own laws, where a death penalty can be applied with just the defendant’s confession and no physical evidence present, such as DNA or blood type matches. 

Lê Văn Mạnh is dead, yet the international record is now clear. The world knows his name, knows the flaws in his trial, knows the torture allegations, and knows that Việt Nam executed him anyway. That knowledge, preserved in UN statements and international human rights documentation, stands as testimony to what must change in Việt Nam. When that day comes, Lê Văn Mạnh can be declared innocent and his conviction overturned.