Lawyers for Lawyers has submitted a communication to several UN Special Procedures mandate holders regarding Decree No. 109/2026, adopted by the Government of Viet Nam on 1 April 2026 and due to take effect on 18 May 2026. The submission raises serious concerns about the compatibility of the Decree with international standards protecting the independence of the legal profession, freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial.
Decree 109/26
Decree 109/26 establishes a broad framework of administrative sanctions applicable to lawyers, law firms, and professional organisations. The sanctions include monetary fines, suspension of legal practice or law firm operations, revocation of practising certificates and licences, and confiscation of evidence and materials allegedly linked to administrative violations.
Of particular concern are provisions empowering local executive and police authorities to directly sanction lawyers, including through the suspension of practising certificates for fixed periods. Moreover, the Decree relies on broad and vaguely defined offences related to lawyers’ professional conduct, including acts such as “insulting the honour” of authorities, “affecting the image and reputation” of the legal profession or “inciting” unlawful complaints.
Intimidation, improper interference, and restrictions on freedom of expression
The lack of precision surrounding these provisions creates a substantial risk of arbitrary interpretation and selective enforcement, particularly against lawyers involved in politically sensitive cases concerning human rights, land disputes, environmental issues, anti-corruption work, or criticism of public authorities. Lawyers for Lawyers is concerned that the Decree creates a serious risk of intimidation, arbitrary enforcement, and improper interference with the professional activities of lawyers. Under the Decree, conduct falling within the normal exercise of legal representation — including courtroom statements, public legal commentary, or assisting clients in pursuing complaints against authorities — may be recharacterised as administrative misconduct.
This creates a significant chilling effect on the legal profession and risks encouraging self-censorship among lawyers, particularly those representing politically sensitive clients or engaging in human rights-related work. The concern is especially acute in disputes involving local authorities. By granting local executive and police authorities the power to suspend practising licences, the Decree subjects lawyers to the oversight of the same entities they may be required to challenge in court, creating an inherent conflict of interest and undermining professional independence.
These provisions therefore appear incompatible with international standards guaranteeing that lawyers must be able to carry out their professional duties without intimidation, harassment, or improper interference, including the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
Lawyer-Client confidentiality and non-identification principle
The Decree also risks undermining fundamental guarantees protecting the lawyer–client relationship, including lawyer–client confidentiality, and the principle that lawyers should not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes.
Particularly concerning are provisions authorising the confiscation of evidence and means allegedly used in the commission of administrative violations. In practice, such measures may create pretexts for authorities to inspect law firm files, interfere with defence strategies, or monitor confidential communications between lawyers and clients. The Decree further raises concerns by sanctioning lawyers for allegedly “inciting” clients to submit complaints, participate in demonstrations, or challenge state actions. Such provisions risk holding lawyers responsible for the actions, views, or political positions of the people they represent.
Erosion of professional independence and autonomy
Another major concern is the transfer of disciplinary authority away from professional legal bodies and towards commune-level executive and police authorities. By granting broad sanctioning powers to local bodies, the Decree shifts oversight of the legal profession increasingly under executive control.
The Decree also introduces extensive reporting and supervisory obligations concerning the governance, activities, and training functions of bar associations. This increased administrative control risks weakening the institutional independence of bar associations and limiting their ability to function as autonomous professional bodies capable of independently regulating and protecting the legal profession.
These developments appear difficult to reconcile with international standards recognising the importance of professional self-regulation and the role of independent bar associations in safeguarding professional integrity and protecting lawyers from improper interference.
Context of systematic harassment affecting lawyers in Viet Nam
The Decree must be understood within the broader context of longstanding restrictions affecting the independence of lawyers and the administration of justice in Viet Nam. For years, lawyers representing government critics, journalists, human rights defenders, religious minorities, land rights activists, and other politically sensitive clients have been subjected to harassment, intimidation, surveillance, disciplinary sanctions, arbitrary detention, and criminal prosecution. This has produced a significant chilling effect, with only a small number of lawyers in Viet Nam willing to take on such cases.
The submission also highlights additional legislative and policy developments suggesting an increasing consolidation of executive control over the legal profession. These include Decree 121/2025, which transferred authority over law practice licences to provincial authorities; a proposal to criminally sanction lawyers who fail to report clients allegedly preparing crimes; and the introduction of a pilot “public lawyer” system under which police officers, military personnel, and other state-affiliated actors may serve as lawyers under a separate regulatory framework.
Call for action
In light of the above, we called on the Special Procedures mandate holders concerned to urge the Government of Viet Nam to repeal or substantially amend Decree 109/26 and to ensure that lawyers are able to carry out their professional duties without intimidation, harassment, reprisals, or fear of government retaliation.
The submission further calls for disciplinary proceedings against lawyers to be conducted exclusively through independent and professionally governed mechanisms consistent with international standards, and urges continued monitoring of both the situation of lawyers in Viet Nam and ongoing legislative initiatives affecting the independence of the legal profession.
