Refuting false arguments about human rights in Global Report 2023 by International Human Rights Watch

Dr. CHU THI THUY HANG
Institute of Human Rights,
Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics

1. Global Report 2023 - The report is “out of tune” and “educational”

Human Rights Watch (HRW), formerly known as Helsinki Watch, was founded by Robert L. Bernstein in 1978, with the purpose of “monitoring” the (former) Soviet Union by collecting documents related to the Soviet Union’s implementation of the conventions of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and supporting human rights protection groups in this country. In 1988, Helsinki Watch merged with a number of other international organizations with the same principles and goals, thereby changing its name to Human Rights Watch(1). HRW’s self-appointed “noble mission” is “to investigate and bring to light human rights violations and to force violators to admit responsibility”; “conducts factual research and investigates human rights violations, reporting impartially on the human rights situation in approximately 90 countries”(2). Giving oneself the right to evaluate the human rights situation without legal basis as well as doubting the reliability of the information given by HRW caused this organization to face many criticisms from national governments, non-governmental organizations, and by media organizations(3).

In HRW’s reports, we can see biased assessments and prejudices against socialist countries and Muslim countries - whose ideologies are contrary to capitalist countries, causing the objectivity of these reports to be questioned due to their political motives. In terms of finances for HRW’s operations, HRW’s 2019 financial report recorded 75% coming from North America, 25% coming from Western Europe, and less than 1% from other regions. Does HRW’s financial dependence on North American countries cause this organization to be manipulated and act according to political schemes? That is why this organization receives four types of criticism: (i) little research of information before writing a report, making it inaccurate; (ii) false and biased reporting; (iii) completely misleading reporting and ideological exploitation; and (iv) sources of operating capital.

Thus, HRW is one of the effective tools in the “peaceful evolution” strategy that hostile forces use to sabotage socialist countries, including Vietnam, under the guise of democracy and human rights. Vietnam is one of the countries that HRW has paid “special attention” to with a distorted view of the human rights situation in Vietnam in its annual human rights reports, press releases, letters to State leaders, the Government of Vietnam, and a number of international agencies and organizations. The annual human rights reports are just a trick of the so-called “old version” by denying human rights achievements in Vietnam, providing information that is scrappy, one-sided, biased, and clearly malicious politically.

In April 2023, HRW continued to publish the 712-page 2023 Global Report. Among them, 6 pages talk about Vietnam(4), HRW does not have any new points in criticizing and evaluating the human rights situation compared to previous reports. Everything is just “old wine in new bottles”, only the time and some so-called “evidences” are given, differing only in timing and some so-called “evidence” presented, while the nature of subversion and distortion remains unchanged. Covering the entire report is the deliberate misrepresentation of democracy and human rights issues by gathering and consolidating criminal cases that prosecution agencies in Vietnam have been and are handling. This organization intentionally attributes journalism issues to defendants who have been prosecuted, investigated, and tried as an excuse to falsely accuse Vietnam of “arresting journalists” and “imprisoning dissidents”, and issued a press release criticizing, condemning, and requesting the Vietnamese Government to immediately and unconditionally release these subjects. HRW also sent letters to the President, Prime Minister of Vietnam, and a number of international organizations to call on Vietnam to improve human rights, and release “prisoners of conscience”, “dissidents”, and bloggers(5).

Obviously, HRW is an organization that is not present in Vietnam, their reports are not based on official sources of the State of Vietnam, nor are they based on any sources of United Nations organizations, such as UNDP, UNESCO, but only based on online sources of individuals and organizations that have hatred for the revolution. Yet, HRW infers, imposes, and judges human rights and then speaks out to teach people about protecting human rights in Vietnam. The 2023 Global Report, by itself, lacks persuasiveness.

2. Global Report 2023 and false arguments about human rights in Vietnam

Firstly, is the absurdity of asserting that Vietnam still has many concerns about human rights violations yet was elected to the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2023-2025 term.

On October 11, 2022, at the United Nations Headquarters, the United Nations General Assembly elected 14 countries, including Vietnam, as members of the Human Rights Council (HRC) for the 2023-2025 term(6). Vietnam received 145/189 approval votes, accounting for nearly 80%, and is in the group receiving the highest support. This bears a very important meaning, showing the efforts and creativity in strategic thinking as well as the effectiveness of the foreign policy of our Party and State in recent years. However, reactionary, and hostile elements exploited this event to distort, oppose, and try to undermine Vietnam’s reputation before, during, and after the event.

Before the vote, reactionary organizations such as Viet Tan and a number of human rights organizations and coalitions of non-governmental human rights groups from Europe, Canada, and the United States continuously sabotaged and opposed Vietnam becoming a member of the HRC through many channels and methods. HRW also actively joined other organizations in writing an open letter asking the United Nations not to allow Vietnam to join the HRC. On October 8, 2022, these organizations unanimously called on countries that are members of the United Nations to reject Vietnam’s eligibility to run for election to the Human Rights Council. In addition, HRW also published many articles, and press releases with a “mocking” attitude, distorting and defaming Vietnam, saying that Vietnam’s participation in HRC is unreasonable and unworthy.

With 145/189 votes in favor, it has been affirmed that Vietnam deserves to be a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council and it cannot be denied that:

Firstly, Vietnam has made many efforts to ensure human rights not only for the Vietnamese people but also as an active member of the international community in affirming the universal values of human rights. To be elected to the United Nations Human Rights Council, each country shall make outstanding progress in protecting human rights domestically and must contribute and launch many initiatives to promote human rights globally. Therefore, Vietnam’s election to HRC twice is the result of the Party and State’s efforts in the field of human rights over many years. The votes also affirm the confidence of countries and the respect of international friends for Vietnam’s position in activities to promote and ensure human rights not only in Vietnam but also in the world.

Secondly, Vietnam fully and seriously implements international commitments of which Vietnam is a member. Vietnam has joined/signed or ratified 7/9 international conventions on human rights(7). As a member state, Vietnam has internalized the provisions of international law into its national legal system. In 2019, Vietnam completed the National Report according to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Third Cycle. Vietnam has received 291 recommendations from 122 countries and has accepted 241 of them.

To date, Vietnam has implemented 82.6% of recommendations with many outstanding results, including many achievements in building a rule-of-law State and perfecting legal institutions; ensuring civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights; carrying out obligations under the Conventions and implementing other international commitments and cooperation related to human rights; strengthening education on human rights(8), and so on.

It is evident that the hundreds of recommendations that Vietnam has received and accepted serve as important motivations for the Government to further improve the enjoyment of human rights in Vietnam.

On March 31, 2022, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs held a ceremony to announce the voluntary mid-term report on implementing UPR Third Cycle recommendations, which Vietnam has approved and informed about Vietnam’s candidacy for the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2023-2025 term. By being the first time to develop a Voluntary Mid-Term Report on the Implementation of UPR Recommendations, Vietnam has become one of the few countries to submit a voluntary mid-term report to the United Nations Human Rights Council. To date, only 79 countries have submitted a Report at least once. Particularly for UPR, Third Cycle, Vietnam is among 20 countries that have developed a voluntary mid-term report(9).

Thirdly, Vietnam’s utmost efforts in carrying out the duties of a responsible member state.

At the 52nd session for the 2023-2025 term, the Council unanimously approved the Resolution commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the 30th anniversary of the Vienna Declaration and Program of Action (VDPA) proposed and drafted by Vietnam (10). This marks a significant milestone for Vietnam in its first session as a member of HRC for the 2023-2025 term. Vietnam’s effective contribution to HRC is a strong response to the distorted rhetoric about Vietnam’s human rights issues. This is the opening step for Vietnam to continue to effectively implement the Project “Vietnam takes on the role of Member of the United Nations Human Rights Council” for the 2023-2025 term. Vietnam’s main focuses during this term are: actively participating and contributing to the work of HRC, both in terms of professional work and administration and coordination; proactively leading and promoting initiatives to demonstrate Vietnam’s footprint and promote its benefits. This will be a strong response to the distorted rhetoric about Vietnam’s human rights issues in the international arena.

Secondly, the baselessness of the argument that Vietnam harasses, threatens, arbitrarily arrests, and mistreats dissidents and human rights activists.

Like other reactionary organizations, HRW refers to these as “prisoners of conscience”. Prisoners of conscience is a term coined by the groups affiliated with Amnesty International struggling for human rights in the early 1960s. They used the term to refer to those who have been detained for non-violent expression of their conscientious beliefs, which they describe as dissidents and human rights activists. They seek to promoted individuals who are lawbreakers, discontented, and politically opportunistic to distort the human rights situation in Vietnam. The term “prisoners of conscience” is only used to deceive public opinion and falsely accuse the Vietnamese state of human rights violations.

Firstly, these are people who violate Vietnamese law. Human rights, in the most general sense, are natural rights, derived from the inherent dignity of humans, recognized, and guaranteed by international and national laws. Law is the legal corridor to recognize rights, ensure the exercise of rights, and is the legal basis to handle violations of rights. Therefore, living and working in accordance with the Constitution and the laws is the responsibility of every citizen. However, reviewing a number of aspects(11), we can see that the subjects who have violated Vietnamese law by using social networks to spread information and documents against the State; exploiting the guise of “struggling for democracy, human rights”, anti-negativity, charity, environment, etc., to propagate against the government; slanderously accuse Vietnam of violating democracy and human rights, and so on.

The handling of these subjects is completely consistent with the provisions of Vietnamese law and international law. The labeling of “prisoners of conscience” is a dangerous plot and trick by hostile and reactionary forces to deceive domestic and international public opinion; and promote, support, and assist those who oppose and sabotage the cause of national construction and development(12).

Secondly, the arrest, trial, and detention of these subjects are carried out according to strict procedures, ensuring equality before the law and the Court. They are tried by a fair and open Court. This is the spirit of the entire judiciary aiming to improve the quality of trials, promote judicial reform, and ensure the independence of the court according to its jurisdiction; judges and jurors judge independently and only obey the law. Building a professional, modern, fair, strict, and honest judiciary that serves the Fatherland, serves the people, protects justice, protects human rights, civil rights, protects the socialist regime, protects the interests of the State, and the legitimate rights and interests of organizations and individuals(13). Therefore, the subjects that HRW calls “prisoners of conscience” when tried in court almost all admit their illegal actions, acknowledged their lack of legal understanding, and carried out actions due to receiving money and being instigated, even threatened, thus felt compelled to participate.

Thirdly, Vietnam has built a system of legal norms against torture that are applied equally to everyone, and all prisoners detained for any crime. All acts of torture will be handled in compliance with the law.

Clause 1, Article 20 of the 2013 Constitution stipulates: “Everyone has the right to physical inviolability, and is protected by law in terms of health, honor, and dignity; not be subjected to torture, violence, coercion, corporal punishment, or any other form of treatment that violates the body, health, honor, or dignity. This right is also stipulated in many legal documents in the criminal, administrative, civil fields, and so on.

Vietnam also signed the United Nations Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment in 2013 and ratified it on November 28, 2014. Shortly after that, Vietnam issued new or comprehensively amended and supplemented important legal documents, and many regulations on torture prevention and control such as the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Law on Organization of Criminal Investigation Agencies, Law on Enforcement of Custody and Detention, and so on.

In practice, any act of torture by people performing official duties will be punished. For example, on September 13, 2018, the People’s Court of Ninh Thuan province tried 05 defendants who were former police officers for using corporal punishment with a penalty of 07 years inprison(14).

Thirdly, HRW arbitrarily concluded that Vietnam has increased repression against non-governmental activists

Firstly, this is contradictory assessment by HRW. The 2023 Global Report criticizes: “A decree issued on August 31 (in Vietnam) prohibits international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) operating in Vietnam from doing work that is inconsistent with the “national interests, violating the law, violating national defense, security, social order and safety” or “social ethics, customs, fine customs, traditions, national cultural identity and destroying the great national unity” of Vietnam. This comment by HRW clearly shows its absurdity; no country in the world would allow any organization or individual violate national security, morality as well as social order and safety.

Secondly, Vietnam does not imprison environmental activists. HRW criticized Vietnam for imprisoning environmental protection activists. This is completely absurd. Vietnam always affirms its commitments to environmental protection, response to climate change, green and sustainable development, clearly stated in many legal documents, guidelines, and policies of Vietnam. Currently, the Government of Vietnam is implementing many comprehensive measures in energy transition, moving growth towards green and circular growth. Vietnam has joined the Philippines and Bangladesh in drafting a resolution related to climate change and human rights, expected to be submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council at its 53rd session. That further shows that Vietnam focuses on and prioritizes issues related to the environment. The fact is that a number of environmental activists were arrested due to their involvement in tax evasion crimes specified in the Vietnam Penal Code.

Thirdly, in Vietnam, hundreds of social organizations and non-governmental organizations are diversifying their activities in many fields. They are allowed to operate according to the law and are responsible before the law. If they violate the law, they will be punished. Those are the progressive values of a State that respects the law and are also the values of a society that respects and protects human rights: not allowing violations of individual and collective rights.

Fourthly, HRW continues to use the “old version rewritten” tactic when criticizing Vietnam for violating civil and political rights.

The 2023 Global Report distorts the situation of ensuring civil and political rights in Vietnam by stating: “Basic civil and political rights are systematically suppressed in Vietnam. The government, under the one-party rule of the Communist Party of Vietnam, strictly restricts the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of association, peaceful assembly, freedom of movement, and freedom of religion.

This unfounded assessment needs to be refuted by the following arguments:

Firstly, according to human rights theory, there are absolute and inviolable rights in all circumstances, but most human rights are relative and can be limited by law under certain conditions. To prevent the exercise of one person’s rights from affecting or threatening the rights and freedoms of others and of the social order in general, the state is responsible for maintaining an order that ensures the freedom of members of society. Thus, restricting human rights is essential to better protect rights(15). The role of the State is to both create space for human freedom, but at the same time to limit that space within a certain scope. From there, it can be seen that the nature of human rights restrictions is the boundary that balances the legal rights of each individual with the common interests of the community. Limiting rights is important and necessary(16).

Secondly, international, regional, and some national laws also recognize the restriction of rights. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) also clearly states specific limitations. For example, Article 19 of the ICCPR provides that freedom of expression may be limited to protect the rights and freedoms of others, such as privacy or trade secrets. At the regional level, human rights documents also contain provisions on rights restrictions. For example, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms has provisions for certain situations in which that right does not apply. The right to physical freedom in Article 5 will not apply in cases where the subject is lawfully arrested or detained.

The American Convention on Human Rights also affirms that freedom of thought and expression is a right that can be limited for reasons of “respect for the rights of others or to protect national security, public order, public health or morals”(17). The right to peaceful assembly and freedom of association are also rights that require implementation in accordance with the law and are necessary in a democratic society(18).

The laws of some countries also impose restrictions on civil and political rights. In the United States, the limits of freedom of speech are expressed mainly through court precedents, especially the United States Supreme Court, which allows the government to prevent and punish speech that is obscene, profane, defamatory, offensive, and aggressive without being considered unconstitutional.

In France, the law on freedom of speech sets limits and strictly punishes abuse of freedom of speech that affects the legitimate rights and interests of others including the protection of human dignity, against slander and libel; fighting against racial and religious discrimination; against inciting violence and causing hatred (Press Freedom Law of 1881); against invasion of privacy (Civil Code); prohibiting the publication of certain documents related to national security (Criminal Law)... The expression of personal opinions on the internet is also governed by the Law on Freedom of the Press.

Thirdly, ensuring the implementation of civil-political rights is increasingly making significant marks in practice.

In March 2023, Vietnam submitted a voluntary mid-term report on the implementation of the ICCPR convention. The report fully and promptly reflects Vietnam’s achievements and efforts in ensuring and promoting civil and political rights in Vietnam. For example, by February 2022, there were 76.95 million Vietnamese people using social networks, equivalent to 78.1% of the population, of which 70.4 million were Facebook users(19).

The whole country currently has over 26.5 million religious followers (accounting for 27% of the population), more than 54 thousand dignitaries, 135 thousand titles, and more than 29 thousand places of worship as well as thousands of concentrated religious activity groups, including concentrated religious activity groups of foreigners legally residing in Vietnam.

Many national and international religious activities with the participation of thousands of people from hundreds of countries and territories are held in Vietnam such as: The Vietnam Buddhist Sangha has hosted the United Nations VESAK Buddha’s Birthday three times; the Festival of Protestants commemorating the 100th anniversary of Protestantism coming to Vietnam, etc. On religious freedom in Vietnam, Pastor Franklin Graham said: “When I return to the United States, I will be your “Ambassador”. I am very happy to share with the American political community and people about the religious freedom I experienced in Vietnam”(20).

Fifthly, the absurdity of mocking the continued development of bilateral relations between Vietnam and Australia by claiming that Australia has ignored and disregarded Vietnam’s “weak human rights record”.

In April 2023, Vietnam and Australia held a human rights dialogue in the context of HRW disseminating false information about Vietnam’s human rights situation. In a mocking tone, HRW also sent a report to the Australian Government before the dialogue and “urged” the Australian Government to set conditions for Vietnam on the following issues: 1) people who are in prison or detention for political reasons; 2) restrictions on freedom of movement; and 3) the repression of freedom to practice religion and belief and the “demanding” of Australia to set consequences for the bilateral relationship if the above violations remain unresolved.

HRW deliberately ignored the information that February 2023 marks the 50th anniversary of establishing diplomatic relations between Australia and Vietnam. Trade relations between the two countries continue to develop. In 2022, Australia will become Vietnam’s seventh-largest trading partner, while Vietnam still maintains its position as Australia’s tenth-largest trading partner. The Vietnam - Australia strategic partnership has seen many strong developments. By the end of February 2023, Australia had 590 investment projects with a total investment capital of nearly USD 1.99 billion, ranking 20th among countries and territories investing in Vietnam, focusing on the fields of processing, manufacturing, accommodation services, healthcare, social assistance, and agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. Vietnam ranks 10th among countries and territories investing in Australia, focusing on agriculture, forestry, wholesale, retail, processing, and manufacturing.

In a relationship based on trust, respect, and friendly cooperation, Australia has truly understood Vietnam’s guidelines and policies in many fields, including human rights. Australia has been one of the first cooperation partners in the field of human rights of the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics from 1995 to the present. Among them, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Asia-Pacific Law Center of the University of Sydney have had nearly 10 years of cooperation with the Academy. In particular, the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics and the Australian Human Rights Commission signed a three-year memorandum of cooperation (2019-2021) on human rights education. This is an important event marking the results of cooperation in the field of promoting and protecting human rights through education, contributing to strengthening the close relationship and strategic cooperation between the two countries of Vietnam and Australia(21).

In Vietnam, ensuring and promoting human rights, primarily the right of national self-determination - a right recognized in Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), is the goal and achievement of the arduous struggle and sacrifice of many generations of Vietnamese people. During more than 35 years of renovation, the Party and the State of Vietnam have always placed the people at the center, considering it both the goal and the driving force of development(22), recognized, trusted, and highly appreciated by the world community. HRW giving itself the right to evaluate countries in ensuring human rights is an absurdity, violating the principles of international law on human rights. If HRW is still passionate about the “mission” it has self-appointed, then one principle that HRW needs to always remember is that global reporting needs to be comprehensive!

_________________

Received: September 11, 2023; Revised: October 8, 2023; Approved for publication: October 18, 2023.

l Endnotes:

(1) Cao Duc Thai: Human Rights Report 2016 of Human Rights Watch (HRW) on Vietnam is completely worthless, Journal of Political Theory, No. 8-2017, p.78.

(2) The tasks that HRW assigns itself are posted on the organization’s website. Currently, HRW is headquartered in: New York, Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Nairobi, Paris, Oslo, San Francisco, São Paulo, Silicon Valley, Sydney, Sweden, Tokyo, Toronto, Washington D.C., Zürich.

(3) On November 28, 2014, the Ministry of Communications and Information of Thailand issued an order banning the website of the HRW organization, as HRW violated Thailand’s national security regulations, considering it a measure to protect order for Thailand. Many countries around the world, a number of non-governmental organizations, the media, and Mr. R.L. Bernstein - one of the founding figures and former president of HRW, have repeatedly criticized HRW. He argued that the organization went against its original mission when it criticized Israel, an open society with a democratic regime, more than dictatorial regimes in the region. R. Murdoch - owner of The Times newspaper, accused HRW of lacking in-depth knowledge and reporting inaccurately on the war in the Gaza Strip and Afghanistan.

(4) HRW’s 2023 Global Report evaluates Vietnam’s human rights situation from page 693 to page 699.

(5) “Global Report 2022” - HRW’s confusion, https://congan.quangtri.gov.vn.

(6) Vietnam has been elected and has successfully fulfilled its role as a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2014-2016 term. Vietnam has been elected twice as an official non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (term 2008-2009 and term 2020-2021).

(7) Vietnam has signed and ratified 7/9 basic international conventions on human rights, including the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Convention against Racial Discrimination 1965, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Convention) 1979, Convention against Torture of 1984, Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2006.

(8), (9) Luu Ly: UPR mid-term report: Vietnam’s strong and consistent commitment to promoting human rights, https://www.xaydungdang.org.vn/.

(10) Resolution commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 30th anniversary of the Vienna Declaration and Program of Action is an initiative of Vietnam, proposed by Deputy Prime Minister Tran Luu Quang at the high-level meeting opening the 52nd session of HRC in Geneva on February 27, 2023.

(11) The subjects have been prosecuted for crimes related to sabotaging the State; propaganda against the government; giving interviews to foreign radio stations and newspapers with content that distorts the Vietnamese situation, and slandering Vietnam for violating democracy and human rights, and so on.

(12) Ta Quang Dao: The so-called “Prisoners of Conscience”, https://dangcongsan.vn.

(13) CPV: Resolution No.27-NQ/TW dated November 9, 2022, on “Continuing to build and perfect the Vietnamese socialist rule of law state in the new period”.

(14) Statement by Lieutenant General Le Quy Vuong, Deputy Minister of Public Security, Head of the Vietnamese delegation at the defense session of Vietnam’s first National Report on the implementation of the Convention against Torture (United Nations Committee against Torture, Geneva, November 14 to 15, 2018).

(15), (16) Nguyen Linh Giang: Theoretical and practical basis for human rights restrictions in Vietnam today, Social Sciences Publishing House, Hanoi, 2022, p.27-28, 30.

(17) American Convention on Human Rights, Article 13.

(18) American Convention on Human Rights, Articles 15, 16.

(19) Huyen Tran: Using social networks: Be free but be Civilized! https://haugiang.gov.vn/.

(20) Duc Minh: Unobjective assessment of human rights in Vietnam, http://quocphongthudo.vn/.

(21) Nguyen Minh: Vietnam-Australia cooperation in promoting human rights education, https://www.vietnamplus.vn.

(22) CPV: Documents of the 13th National Party Congress, Vol. I, National Political Publishing House, Hanoi, 2021, p.28.