Completing the mechanism for controlling executive power under the conditions of a single party in Vietnam

Assoc. Prof., Dr. LAM QUOC TUAN
Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics
Dr. DANG VIET DAT
Academy of Politics Region IV

1. Introduction

During the process of building the Vietnamese State, the MCEP has been continuously improved and refined towards greater effectiveness and efficiency, in order to promote and ensure socialist democracy, and at the same time repel problems such as corruption, bureaucracy, nepotism, arrogance, etc.. However, this mechanism is still limited, and there still exists frustrations in today’s society about violations of the people’s democratic rights; corruption, nepotism, bureaucracy, and arrogance; the issuance of administrative decisions and legal documents lacks reasonableness and legality, and the lack of responsibility of officials, civil servants, and public employees in performing public duties, etc.. The above problems require the Party and the State to continue to enhance the mechanism to effectively control executive power in the context of the single-party system in Vietnam.

2. The necessity of perfecting the mechanism for controlling executive power under the conditions of the single-party system in Vietnam

The MCEP is essentially a combination of political and legal means and tools implemented by state agencies, social organizations, and citizens through various forms of supervision and inspection, examination, adjudication, auditing, social criticism, etc., in order to detect, prevent, and limit the risk of violations, as well as abusive, autocratic, and arbitrary acts by agencies exercising executive power and by civil servants and public employees, ensuring that executive power is exercised for the right and effective purpose. Thereby, order is established in management, protecting the rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests of citizens and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of state management. With this approach, the need to perfect the MCEP in the new condition in Vietnam comes from the following requirements:

Firstly, it stems from the sole leadership position of the Communist Party of Vietnam over the executive power-holding agencies

The sole leadership and ruling position of the Communist Party of Vietnam has been enshrined in the Constitutions of 1980, 1992 and 2013. This constitutional provision ensures the political and legal basis to affirm its legitimacy, constitutionality, legality that: The Communist Party of Vietnam is the sole ruling and leading the State and society of Vietnam to carry out the tasks of the socialist revolution. This clearly affirms the prestige, capacity, revolutionary nature, pioneering and historical mission of the Communist Party of Vietnam.

The Party’s leadership and authority over executive agencies involves holding and influencing the organization and exercise of executive power. This includes the issuance of resolutions and organizing the implementation of resolutions on organization and operation of law enforcement agencies; “nominating individuals to elected bodies to elect or approve personnel to hold key positions in the executive apparatus; providing opinions on specific issues in the exercise of executive power according to the Party’s rules and regulations”(1); inspect and supervise the implementation of the Party’s resolutions, the Constitution and the State’s laws; propagate and educate officials, civil servants, and public employees of law enforcement agencies. It also emphasizes the role model responsibility of party members, especially those in leadership and head positions within the executive power.

Inspection and supervision are among the Party’s methods of leadership and authority over agencies exercising executive power, and at the same time a method of controlling the Party’s executive power. The Party’s control of executive power is to ensure that the activities of executive agencies comply with the Party’s guidelines and policies, and the State’s laws and policies, while simultaneously promoting the Party’s leadership and ruling role over agencies exercising executive power. The Party’s control of executive power does not carry state power. Therefore, when violations in the organization and exercise of executive power are detected, Party organizations request that executive agencies amend, suspend, or annul these wrongful decisions within their authority. In cases where the executive agency is determined not to make changes, the party organization has the right, based on the Party’s regulations, to handle violations committed by party members leading that executive apparatus and responsible party members responsible for violations in the organization and exercise of executive power.

Secondly, stemming from the important position and role of the executive branch in the organization and implementation of state power under the leadership of the Communist Party of Vietnam

Both theoretical and practical political experience in Vietnam have demonstrated that “a rule-of-law state is a method of organizing and exercising state power”(2), in which “the executive power serves as both the input and output for legislative and judicial powers”(3). Therefore, Resolution No. 27-NQ/TW of the 13th Party Central Executive Committee determined: “Clarify the authority and responsibility of the executive agency in controlling agencies exercising legislative power and judicial power”(4). This is one of the important tasks to perfect the mechanism of controlling state power and clarify the characteristics of the Socialist rule-of-law State of Vietnam: “The Socialist rule-of-law State of Vietnam is led by the Communist Party of Vietnam (...) the state power is unified, with clear division, close coordination and effective control among state agencies in the implementation of legislative, executive, and judicial branches”(5).

Executive power includes regulatory power and administrative power. Regulatory power is the authority to issue regulatory documents (subordinate legislation) to concretize laws and guide state activities according to the law; administrative power is the authority to organize and manage all social activities according to legal regulations. In the Socialist rule-of-law State of Vietnam, along with legislative and judicial powers, executive powers affirm the important position and role of the State in organizing the exercise of power based on the principle of ensuring supremacy of the Constitution and laws, and the people’s right to mastery in society and the comprehensive and unified leadership of the Party over the State. This affirms that, in the current Vietnamese state power structure, the executive power is the most important and the central component of state power.

In relation to legislative power, the executive branch plays a role in implementing laws in practice. In the course of fulfilling its functions and duties, the entity exercising executive power will timely identify new social relations, thereby proposing new laws or recommending amendments and supplements to legal provisions that are no longer appropriate to reality for the legislative body to amend, supplement, or enact new laws. Additionally, in the relationship with judicial power, the subject exercising executive power identifies legal violations during the implementation of laws and conducts judicial procedures to strengthen the case files and evidence for those violations so that the judicial body can adjudicate. After the judicial body conducts a trial, the executive branch is responsible for enforcing the legally effective judgments issued by the judicial body. This demonstrates that the executive branch plays a central role in the rise and fall of each nation, with the government being the core of the executive power.

In reality, the agencies exercising executive power from the central to local levels are state agencies that directly carry out organizational and administrative activities of socio-economic activities (including the economy, culture, society, national security - defense, foreign affairs, etc.). Therefore, executive agencies are the entities that directly handle the affairs of individuals, businesses, and socio-political, social organizations. Due to these characteristics, the executive branch is always the dominant branch of power, exercising power directly over the people, so the possibility of abuse of power is often higher. As a result, the establishment of a mechanism to control executive power must be emphasized in the design and practical implementation of state power. If executive power is fully, properly, and reasonably exercised, legal and effective state management will lead to sustainable economic and social development. Conversely, if executive power is “corrupted”, it will erode the legitimacy, effectiveness, and efficiency of state management in practice, leading to instability in economic and social development. Therefore, controlling executive power is always a top priority in the process of organizing and exercising state power.

Thirdly, the risk of the executive branch becoming corrupt in the context of a one-party ruling system in Vietnam

In the context of a one-party ruling system, the risk of “corruption” of political power and state power in a portion of cadres, civil servants, public employees, and party members is real. The 13th National Party Congress clearly pointed out that “The deterioration of political ideology, ethics, lifestyle, individualism, “group interests”, wastefulness, insensitivity, and the drawbacks of the pursuit of achievements in a part of the Party cadres and party members have not been effectively addressed”(6), which erodes the people’s trust in the Party and the State, threatening the stability and development of the country.

The root cause of the aforementioned situation lies in the fact that “some Party committees, Party organizations, and leaders have not adhered to the Party’s principles, especially democratic centralism; There is also instances of localism, disunity, overreach, imposing decisions, abuse of power, avoidance, fear of responsibility, and lax leadership”(7). Therefore, our Party requires clarification of “the risks that need to be prevented for a ruling party”(8) such as “communist arrogance”, “masquerading as a revolutionary official” by cadres and party members or “authoritative, autocratic behavior”, “making excuses, acting on behalf of the State”, etc., as a basis for continuing to renovate the Party’s leadership and ruling methods over the political system in the new period.

In a parliamentary system, the risks of “corruption” of state power are most clearly concentrated in agencies that exercises executive power. Cases of corruption, harassment, tyranny, arrogance, etc., mainly take place in areas where executive power is exercised. Therefore, “corruption (...) is a common disease of all societies with a state, with many causes, including the arbitrariness of people holding state power”(9). However “in each different state regimes, the nature and levels of corruption are also different, depending on the class nature, the methods of organizing and exercising of state power, and on the capacity and ethics of the state’s civil servants”(10).

In the reality of Vietnam, the scope of executive power is very broad, with a multi-tiered massive apparatus, making it challenging to control. The subjects exercising this executive power undertake socio-economic development tasks such as planning, taxation, state budget collection and expenditure, planning, implementing public policies and enforcing laws. Therefore, when holding executive power, these subjects always tend to expand their power and use it thoroughly to turn it into an effective tool to satisfy needs and interests in society, even illegal needs and interests. Additionally, “the discontinuity (as the people do not act directly themselves but delegate it to representatives) and the continuity of state power (collective power entrusted to individuals) personal will for those in leadership positions. Although they are supposed to adhere to the common will in principle, in practice, their activities can become overwhelming or even dominate the common will. This paradox necessitates that executive power be controlled”(11).

Therefore, those who use executive power to perform public duties (officers, civil servants, public employees) are often prone to usurp power, abuse power, overuse power, or in other words, be “corrupted” by executive power if it is not effectively controlled. This is the fundamental cause of the evils of corruption, bureaucracy, tyranny, and arrogance in agencies exercising executive power that all states must confront. Therefore, in the process of organizing and exercising state power, executive power must be strictly controlled to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of state management.

Fourthly, executive power - an important part of state power - originates from the people’s power

Marxism - Leninism has proven that state power must be based on the will and aspirations of the people and guaranteed to be implemented by the power of the legitimate state apparatus. State power does not exist for its own sake, its appearance and existence is an objective necessity of class society. The origin of state power comes from the social community. Ultimately, “state power is essentially only derivative power originating from people’s power”(12). This means the people are the supreme subjects of state power, and state power cannot be outside or exceed the public power of society. Therefore, state power and people’s power are always inversely proportional to each other. The more state power is expanded, the more the people’s power will be narrowed. Controlling state power, in general, and controlling executive power, in particular, aims to ensure that state power is within safe limits compared to people’s power, ensuring socialist democracy, the people’s sovereignty, and ensuring that while the people delegate authority, they do not lose their rights, and that state power does not overshadow the people’s power.

In its relationship with citizens, the state must demonstrate its responsibility through executive agencies. Accordingly, the state must establish and maintain mechanisms of controlling executive power to ensure that executive power is exercised in accordance with its commitments to its people. In a well-operating state, the state is subject to both external control by its citizens and internal control imposed on itself through state institutions empowered to limit executive power. In the representative democracy mechanism, “the relationship between the state and the people is one of representation and delegation, a fundamental method for addressing the shortcomings of collective action. Moreover, this method takes advantage of the benefits of labor division and professionalism. However, it is also evident that this relationship contains inherent challenges that need to be addressed”(13). One such challenge is that there may be a divergence of interests between the people-the supreme holders of state power-and the officials, civil servants, and public employees (those entrusted by the people). Additionally, the asymmetry of information and actions between the people and the persons authorized by the people also leads to the authorized people “turning their backs” on the people’s interests. controlling executive power helps to address these challenges.

Therefore, every state must have an effective mechanism of controlling executive power. On the one hand, this mechanism must ensure that the executive branch has sufficient power and resources to function and fulfill its responsibilities; on the other hand, it must tightly restrain executive power to prevent it from being distorted and becoming a tool for officials, civil servants, and public employees to seek personal gain at the expense of the people’s interests.

3. The content perfecting the mechanism of controlling executive power in the context of single-party rule in Vietnam today

MCEP is a unified entity of basic elements, including: (1) institutions (system of Party regulations and State legal regulations) on controlling executive power and (2) institutions (system of agencies of the Party, State, Fatherland Front, socio-political organizations) that organize the implementation of control over executive power.

In the process of building a socialist rule-of-law state, Vietnam continuously improves and perfects the methods of organizing and exercising power in an effective and efficient manner, in order to promote and ensure socialist democracy. The people authorize power for the State while not their losing their own power, and at the same time repel problems such as corruption, bureaucracy, nepotism, arrogance, and so on.

The issue of controlling executive power has been a focus of the Party and State, yielding certain results, making an important contribution to the stability and development of the country. However, MCEP has not yet affectively created a “safe brake” for the operation of the “wheel of power”. Bureaucracy, corruption, and nepotism in the state apparatus remain complex issues, with instances and locations where there are serious violations of the people’s democratic rights.

To perfect MCEP in the context of the single-party system in Vietnam today, it is necessary to focus on the following content:

Firstly, develop a law on the Party’s leadership to codify Article 4 of the 2013 Constitution, which clearly stipulates the tasks, powers and responsibilities of the Party Central Committee, the Politburo, and the Secretariat; The Party’s responsibility before the State, the people and the nation; The Party’s leadership methods for agencies exercising legislative power, executive power, judicial power, the Fatherland Front and socio-political organizations, etc.; concretize the Party’s inspection and supervision mechanism, especially for subjects exercising executive power.

Secondly, strengthen Party committees’ inspection and supervision at all levels, of those exercising executive power.

Party committees, Party organizations, and collective leadership bodies at all levels responsible for exercising executive power must thoroughly grasp the relevant guidelines, adapt them to the specific circumstances, and regularly conduct inspections and supervision. They are required to report annually to their direct superior on the implementation of the following regulations: Politburo Regulation No. 144-QD/TW dated May 9, 2024, on revolutionary ethical standards of cadres and Party members in the new period; Politburo Regulation No. 131-QD/TW dated October 27, 2023, on controlling power, preventing and combating corruption and negativity in inspection, supervision, enforcement of Party discipline, as well as in the activities of inspection and auditing; Politburo Regulation No. 132-QD/TW dated October 27, 2023, o on controlling power, preventing and combating corruption and negativity in investigation, prosecution, trial and judgment enforcement activities; Politburo Regulation No. 114-QD/TW dated July 11, 2023, on controlling power and preventing and combating corruption and negativity in the personnel work.

The Central Inspection Commission, in collaboration with the Central Internal Affairs Commission, the Party Committee of the Government Inspectorate, the Party Committee of the State Audit Office, the Party Committee of the Vietnam Fatherland Front, and other socio-political organizations, will take the lead in monitoring, urging, inspecting, and supervising the implementation of measures to control executive power and combat corruption in inspection, investigation, auditing, and judicial activities.

Strengthen the close coordination between the Party’s inspection and supervision activities and the supervision of the National Assembly, People’s Councils at all levels, state inspection and auditing, and the investigation, prosecution, adjudication, and oversight activities of law enforcement agencies with regard to those exercising executive power. Improve the effectiveness of coordination between inspection and supervision of the Party with supervision and social criticism of the Fatherland Front, socio-political organizations, press, mass media and direct supervision performed by the people over organizations exercising executive power.

Thirdly, continue to improve the legal framework for publicity, transparency and accountability for agencies exercising executive power and organize the proper implementation of these legal regulations.

To effectively control executive power, the requirements for openness, transparency and accountability within state agencies must be clearly and strictly stipulated in legal documents. To fulfill this requirement, the Vietnamese legal system needs to continue to clearly define the responsibilities of agencies exercising executive power in implementing openness, transparency and accountability, including: (i) agencies exercising executive power at all levels must “proactively provide information on policy-related data, such as the figures used as the basis for policy formation, the actual impacts, consequences, and methods of implementation. Besides information sources, the attributes of information (clarity, consistency, comprehensiveness, honesty, quality, and reliability) also play a crucial role in the oversight process”(14); (ii) agencies exercising executive power must have “responsibility for creating conditions for people to exercise their right to access information - directly or indirectly to government records and documents (except for confidential information according to laws regarding state secrets)”(15); (iii) “publicity of meetings of the Government and People’s Committees at all levels”(16); (iv) before drafting and implementing policies, agencies exercising executive power “must systematically consult relevant groups, including disseminating information and addressing feedback received through this consultation. Therefore, it is necessary to specifically stipulate the content, timing, and methods of implementing transparency and accountability by state agencies towards the public and competent state authorities, etc.”(17).

Fourthly, improve the supervision activities of elected bodies (National Assembly and People’s Councils at all levels) over agencies exercising executive power at all levels.

The bodies of the National Assembly (National Assembly Standing Committee, Nationalities Council, National Assembly Committees), National Assembly Delegations and National Assembly deputies themselves, must enhance “the quality of their supervision in a professional manner, focused, concentrated, and specialized. Currently, the number of the 15th National Assembly deputies working full-time is only 38.67%(18). To build a National Assembly that operates regularly, continuously, and professionally, it is necessary to increase the full-time ratio to over 40%: “The number of National Assembly deputies operating full-time should be at least 40% of the total number of National Assembly delegates”(19). Beside, it is necessary to “drastically reduce the number of National Assembly deputies who concurrently hold leadership and management positions in local governments”, because without a clear division of labour and power, it will lead to a “split role” for National Assembly delegates: “acting both as National Assembly delegates and as officials in local executive agencies. This makes it difficult for the National Assembly’s oversight function over local governments to be effectively exercised”(20).

Fifthly, perfect the organization and operation of specialized state agencies controlling executive power.

First, the Government should continue to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of inspection work, overcoming the delay in issuing inspection conclusions. To fulfill this requirement, the inspection sector needs to combine specialized inspections with administrative inspections, combine regular inspections with irregular inspections, focusing on complex issues, prone to corruption and long-standing pressing problems of the people. In addition, the inspection sector needs to focus on improving its expertise, professionalism, skills, behavior, professional ethics, and political will, moving towards a more professional manner for officers and public servants performing inspection work. Invest in modern equipment; develop coordination regulations between local inspection agencies and socio-political organizations, between government agencies at all levels and specialized inspection agencies. This aims to resolve the issue of having too many different agencies conducting inspections on the same subject at the same time with overlapping content.

In addition, the Government needs to continue to consolidate and organize the sectoral and state inspection apparatus, and the complete legal regulations on inspection activities. This includes clearly defining the order and procedures for inspections, the duties, powers and legal responsibilities of those conducting inspections, as well as the rights and obligations of the subject of inspection to overcome the situation of “widespread, arbitrary inspections without ground or legal basis, lacking conclusions on inspection results, causing trouble and expense for subjects being inspected, as has been observed in some localities”(21).

Second, the State Audit needs to continue to promote its role in controlling executive power by improving the quality of audits to strictly control state budget collection and expending activities, the management and use of public finance and assets of subjects exercising executive power. The State Audit should also increase thematic audits to ensure that the auditing process thoroughly addresses issues of public concern and dissatisfaction, identifying root causes and assigning clear responsibility. This serves as a basis for relevant authorities to address violations by individuals or organizations. In particular, the State Audit should continue to prioritize large-scale and wide-ranging thematic audit, selecting topics and themes related to local “hot-debated” issues for audit to comprehensively evaluate the management and use of public finance and public assets, thereby deeply analyzing and evaluating the effectiveness of economic and financial policies. This, in turn, helps the National Assembly and the Government have a basis to improve policies and close loopholes in mechanisms and policies on public finance and public asset management.

Third, the National Assembly needs to research and build a parliamentary inspection body to contribute to improving the effectiveness of controlling executive power. This would be a specialized supervising agency under the National Assembly, with the main task of helping the National Assembly conduct investigations to clarify the political and legal responsibilities of senior officials at the central level and within the administrative apparatus when there are signs of legal violations or breaches of public service ethics, as well as issues that cause public concern. This would enable the competent state agencies to investigate and prosecute these subjects before the Supreme Court.

To ensure that the National Assembly Inspectorate operates effectively, should be granted special authorities, such as having absolute access to all state information, compelling relevant agencies to cooperate in resolving issues, taking measures to prevent violations or to facilitate inspections and investigations, and having the authority to investigate and prosecute administrative and corruption-related cases. In the area of addressing complaints and denunciations, this body should be responsible for guiding and assisting complainants and whistleblowers, and for overseeing the resolution of complaints and denunciations by citizens.

Fourth, the State needs to continue to improve the judicial mechanism of the judiciary agencies over the executive agencies and build an independent constitutional jurisdiction, including: focusing on perfecting the organization and operation of the court system, especially administrative courts and administrative procedural legal system; establish party organizations in unified vertical court agencies to ensure the independence of the court according to its jurisdiction; establish an effective specialized agency to protect the Constitution; strengthen the position, role and authority of the State President in controlling the organization and operation of the Government and the Prime Minister.

Sixthly, the National Assembly and the Government should continue to clearly define the functions and tasks between agencies exercising executive power and enhance decentralization and delegation of powers.

The National Assembly needs to amend the Law on Government Organization and the current Law on Local Government Organization to clearly stipulate the model and principles of organization and operation of urban, rural, island and special administrative - economic units and related laws to codify the provisions in Article 3 of Resolution No. 04-NQ/CP dated January 10, 2022, by the Government on promoting decentralization and delegation of powers in state management.

The Government should effectively implement Resolution No. 04-NQ/CP dated January 10, 2022, particularly by reviewing, amending, supplementing and completing regulations on the functions, tasks, powers, and organizational structure of ministries, branches and localities. This should be done in conjunction with further promoting administrative reform, strengthening inspection, supervision, and control of power over state management agencies from central to local levels in performing tasks and exercising powers according to decentralization and delegation of powers. It is essential that decentralization and delegation of powers be accompanied by corresponding decentralization of public resource management.

In addition, to effectively control executive power, the Government needs to “implement the principle that each task is assigned to one lead agency with primary responsibility, while other relevant agencies coordinate in execution; gradually eliminate inter-sectoral coordination mechanisms, with clearly defined responsibilities for the heads of agencies”(22). This creates a clear legal mechanism for the execution of functions and tasks, making it easier for specialized agencies to inspect, supervise, monitor and evaluate the exercise of powers of these entities, thereby contributing to “strengthening control of power within each agency and among state agencies, between the Central and local governments, among local levels of government and among agencies within the same level of government”(23).

In addition, the execution of executive power must adhere to the principle that “all power must be strictly controlled by mechanism, must be bound by responsibility, and the higher the power is, the greater the responsibility; Abuse of power must be held accountable and punished”(24); Power control must be “tied to strict discipline and order in the activities of the State and public servants”(25). Furthermore, the allocation of legislative, executive, and judicial powers among state bodies must be clearly defined, closely coordinated, and effectively monitored. Therefore, the Party has set forth the requirement to clearly define the authority and responsibilities of executive bodies in relation to legislative and judicial bodies, and the judiciary’s role in controlling the executive bodies.

Seventhly, the Government and local authorities at all levels should intensify administrative reform in accordance with the views of the 13th National Party Congress and Resolution No. 76/NQ-CP dated July 15, 2021 of the Government, which issued the Master Program on State administrative reform for the period 2021 - 2030, in order to “continue to build a democratic, professional, modern, streamlined, effective, efficient administration with a capacity for developmental governance, integrity, and service to the people”(26). In this regard, the Government has identified the focus of administrative reform during this period as institutional reform, particularly focusing on building and improving the institutional system of the administration and enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of law enforcement; building a professional, competent, and ethical cadre of officials and public servants to meet the requirements of national development, with particular emphasis on reforming wage policies; and developing and promoting e-government and digital government. These efforts are considered one of the breakthroughs in the development of the country and also contribute to improving the MCEP in Vietnam today.

4. Conclusion

The MCEP in the context of the single-party system in Vietnam has been established and is being continuously improved. Under the Party’s leadership, the MCEP needs to continue to be improved to meet the country’s development requirements under the new conditions. This includes continuing to improve the institutional framework for exercising power and institutions controlling executive power, especially specialized and independent institutions, in order to improve the effectiveness of executive power control.

Received: May 19, 2024; Revised: June 10, 2024; Approved for Publication: June 20, 2024.

Endnotes:

(1) To Giang, Nguyen Van Cuong: The ruling party through legislative, executive and judicial powers in Vietnam, http://hoiluatgiavn.org.vn, April 10, 2021.

(2) Truong Ho Hai, Dang Viet Dat: “Building and perfecting Vietnam’s socialist rule-of-law state in the new period”, Communist Review, No. 8-2023, p.66.

(3) Tran Ngoc Duong: Some issues of assignment, coordination, and control of power in building a socialist rule-of-law State of Vietnam, National Political Publishing House, Hanoi, 2011, p.309.

(4), (5) Resolution No. 27-NQ/TW dated November 9, 2022, Sixth Conference of the 13th Party Central Committee on continuing to build and perfect the socialist rule-of-law state Vietnam in the new period, pages 14, 5.

(6) CPV: Documents of the 13th National Party Congress, vol.I, National Political Publishing House, Hanoi, 2021, p.95.

(7), (24) Resolution No. 28-NQ/TW dated November 17, 2022, of the Sixth Conference of the 13th Party Central Committee on continuing to renovate the Party’s leadership and governance methods towards the political system in the new period.

(8) CPV: Documents of the 12th National Party Congress, Party Central Committee Office, Hanoi, 2016, p.217.

(9) Nguyen Dang Dung: Limiting the arbitrariness of state agencies, Justice Publishing House, Hanoi, 2010, p.17.

(10) Phan Xuan Son, Pham Tien Luc: Identifying corruption and solutions to prevent and combat corruption in Vietnam today, National Political Publishing House, Hanoi, 2008, p.17.

(11), (13) Trinh Thi Xuyen: Controlling state power - Some theoretical and practical issues, National Political Publishing House, Hanoi, 2008, pp.31, 38.

(12) Pham Hong Thai: People’s power and state power through constitutions, Science Journal, Hanoi National University, Jurisprudence, No. 25, 2005, pp.1-2.

(14), (15), (16), (17), (20), (21) Truong Ho Hai, Dang Viet Dat: Completing the legal mechanism of assignment, coordination, and control of housing power in Vietnam South today, Political Theory Journal, No. 2, 2021, pp.118, 118, 118, 118, 119, 119.

(18) Le Anh: Increase the proportion of full-time National Assembly deputies - towards an increasingly professional National Assembly, https://quochoi.vn, December 17, 2023.

(19) Clause 2, Article 23 of the Law on Organization of the National Assembly, 2014, amended and supplemented in 2020.

(22), (23), (25) Resolution No. 27-NQ/TW dated November 9, 2022, of the 6th Conference of the 13th Party Central Committee on continuing to build and perfect the Socialist rule-of-law State of Vietnam in the new situation.

(26) Resolution No. 76/NQ-CP on the Master Program for State Administrative Reform for the period 2021 - 2030.