Individual Corruption

According to Global Corruption Barometer 2013, over half of household respondents believe the judiciary is corrupt. 

Business Corruption

Companies should be aware that the legal system lacks transparency and consistency, and, according to Global Integrity 2011, verdicts are often preordained before a case is tried. The Investment Climate Statement 2013 describes the legal system as insufficient and burdensome, and the Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index 2013 indicates that companies see it as a major obstacle for conducting business. As a result, companies are less optimistic that the courts will uphold property rights and contracts, not as confident that it can be used to appeal corrupt behaviour of officials, and highly unlikely to resolve commercial disputes in the courts.

Political Corruption

The Constitution grants the judiciary independence from political influence. However, according to Freedom in the World 2013, this is not true in practice as the ruling Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) controls courts at all levels. Courts rarely rule against members of the government or take on sensitive cases due to fear over the consequences. The Human Rights Report 2013 also reports that the judicial system is strongly distorted by political influence, endemic corruption and inefficiency. The same report also states that the courts have had high-profile cases involving those charged with criticising or harming the CPV. Furthermore, the report describes that many judges do not have adequate legal training and their appointments are based on personal relationships with party officials or their political views.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2014:
- On average, it takes 34 procedures and 400 days at a cost of 36% of the claim to enforce a contract through the courts, which is significantly more efficient than regional averages.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014:
- Business executives give the independence of the judiciary from influences of members of government, citizens, or companies a score of 3.4 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give both the efficiency of the legal system for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations scores of 3.4 and 3.3, respectively, on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2013:
- 53% of households surveyed consider the judiciary to be either 'corrupt' or 'extremely corrupt'.

- Citizens give the judiciary a score of 3.5 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Individual Corruption

According to the Global Corruption Barometer 2013, the Vietnamese police is considered to be the most corrupt public institution in the country. According to Youth Integrity Survey 2011, more than one-tenth of surveyed respondents rate integrity in traffic police as 'very bad'.

Business Corruption

According to a World Bank 2013 report, traffic police are likely to pose difficulties for companies doing business in Vietnam, leading to opportunities for corruption.

Political Corruption

According to the Human Rights Report 2013, corruption is a serious problem in all levels of the police, and corrupt police officials sometimes act with impunity. Global Integrity 2011 reports that appointments to police posts are not based on professional qualifications but on rank or how long an individual has served in the police. Furthermore, purchasing of positions and nepotism are common practices.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014:
- Business executives give the reliability of Vietnamese police services to enforce law and order a score of 3.8 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'cannot be relied upon at all' and 7 being 'can always be relied upon').

The World Bank: Corruption from the Perspective of Citizens, Firms and Public Officials 2013:
- 60% of the surveyed public officials identify traffic police as the most corrupt sector.

- 63% of the surveyed firms identify traffic police as the most corrupt sector.

- 21% of the surveyed firms identify traffic police as one of the three agencies most likely to make difficulties.

- 16% of the surveyed firms reported paying unofficial money most often when dealing with traffic police.

- More than 65% of the surveyed citizens identify traffic police as the most corrupt sector.

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2013:
- 37.5% of households surveyed consider the police to be either 'corrupt' or 'extremely corrupt'.

- Citizens give the police a score of 4.0 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Individual Corruption

It is reported that to extort bribes, public officials sometimes delay citizens’ access to passports, according to the Human Rights Report 2013. In 2011, Transparency International Vietnam conducted a special case study on the health sector in Vietnam, revealng that informal payments to health sector employees have become a norm in the country. Some informal payments are given voluntarily after treatment, and some are given in order to receive better health care. According to Youth Integrity Survey 2011, a small percentage of respondents rates integrity in public health care and public education as 'very bad'.

Business Corruption

According to a World Bank 2013 report, a significant number of surveyed enterprises state that the construction permit service is likely to make difficulties for businesses. Based on all the results from the survey, the report also concludes that surveyed agencies creating the most difficulties are also those receiving the most informal payments and gifts. 

Political Corruption

According to a World Bank 2013 report, surveyed public officials perceive corruption in the construction sector to be prevalent.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2014:
- On average, to obtain a construction permit, a company must go through 11 procedures and spend 114 days at a cost of approximately 56.3% of income per capita.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014:
- Business executives give government administrative requirements (permits, regulations and reporting) in Vietnam a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely burdensome' and 7 'not burdensome at all').

The World Bank: Corruption from the Perspective of Citizens, Firms and Public Officials 2013:
- 30% of the surveyed public officials identify construction as the most corrupt sector.

- Approximately 20% of the surveyed firms identify construction as the most corrupt sector.

- Approximately 25% of the surveyed firms identify the construction licence service as a difficulty-making agency.

- Almost 30% of the surveyed citizens identify construction as the most corrupt sector.

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2013:


- 58% of citizens believe the medical and health sector to be ‘corrupt/extremely corrupt’.

- Citizens give the medical and health sector a score of 3.5 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt'). 


Individual Corruption

A 2013 report by the World Bank states that surveyed citizens perceive land administration as the second most corrupt sector in Vietnam.

Business Corruption

The Vietnam Development Report 2012 indicates that companies feel more subject to bribe requests when online availability of land-related documents is limited. According to a World Bank 2013 report, surveyed enterprises state that the land administration is the second most corrupt sector. A 2011 study conducted by the Embassy of Denmark, the Embassy of Sweden and the World Bank identifies several key risk factors for corruption in the process of land acquisition and land allocation. For example, it is difficult to access information regarding land-use planning, so investors pay bribes to land officials in exchange for information privileges. The same report also mentions that land supply problems encourage corrupt behaviour among enterprises and officials, and, because of the rental fees investors can extract in the future from selling the land, they may have incentives to offer a large bribes in order to secure the land.

Political Corruption

According to the Human Rights Report 2013, corruption in land use has been widely publicised in the press in an effort to pressure local officials to stop abusing their authority. There are widespread reports of corruption and a general lack of transparency in the government's process of confiscating land and of moving citizens to make infrastructure projects. Surveyed public officials state that the land administration is the most corrupt sector, as reported in a 2013 World Bank report. According to Vietnam Development Report 2012, a lack of public access to information has created a disincentive for offices to freely provide land information. The limited availability of this information has driven up the value of land information and has allowed land officers to reap extra profits.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2014:
- The process of registering property and securing property rights is relatively cheap and easy in Vietnam compared to regional averages, requiring  an average of 4 procedures and taking 57 days at a cost of 0.6% of the property value.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014:
- Business executives give the protection of property rights in Vietnam, including financial assets, a score of 3.5 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'very weak' and 7 'very strong').

The World Bank: Corruption from the Perspective of Citizens, Firms and Public Officials 2013:
- Approximately 63% of the surveyed public officials identify land administration as the most corrupt sector.

- Approximately 55% of the surveyed firms identify land administration as the most corrupt sector.

- 60% of the surveyed citizens identify land administration as the most corrupt sector.

Individual Corruption

More than half of the surveyed households list corruption in taxation as prevalent, according to a World Bank 2013 report. 

Business Corruption

According to the Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index 2013, a substantial percentage of companies operating in Vietnam claim that negotiating with tax officials is an essential part of doing business. Corruption in the sector is fuelled by the discretion of tax officials and by varying taxation policies and procedures. Furthermore, the number of tax regulations is deemed too burdensome for SMEs to adequately manage them. According to Global Integrity 2011, small- and medium-sized companies are vulnerable to corrupt tax officials. The same report states that tax laws are generally enforced uniformly, but there can be some back-door negotiations between tax agents and companies due to arbitrary and discriminatory tax rules.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2014:
- On average, a medium-sized company must make 32 separate tax payments per year that take 872 hours to complete at a total tax rate of 35.2% of annual company profits.

The World Bank: Corruption from the Perspective of Citizens, Firms and Public Officials 2013:
- Approximately 15% of the surveyed public officials identify tax administration as the most corrupt sector.

- 30% of the surveyed firms identify tax administration as the most corrupt sector.

- Approximately 9% of the surveyed citizens identify tax administration as the most corrupt sector.

Individual Corruption

The Investment Climate Statement 2013 states that local administrative agencies have seen drastic drops in petty corruption. However, surveyed citizens perceive customs to be among the most corruption-prone sectors, according to a World Bank 2013 report.

Business Corruption

A large number of surveyed companies report that customs is the most corrupt sector, as reported in a World Bank 2013 report. More than half of foreign investors engaged in exports admit that making informal payments to customs is common, according to the Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index 2011. This is mirrored in the Global Enabling Trade Report 2014, where respondent business executives rate the transparency of the border administration in regards to irregular payments in exports and imports as relatively low.

Political Corruption

Customs is notoriously corrupt, and officials have been convicted for helping organised syndicates in smuggling activities. According to a World Bank 2013 report, more than four out of five surveyed public officials consider corruption in customs to be prevalent.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2014:
- On average, a standard export shipment of goods requires 5 documents and takes 21 days at a cost of USD 610 per container.

- On average, a standard import shipment of goods requires 8 documents and takes 21 days at a cost of USD 600 per container.

World Economic Forum: The Global Enabling Trade Report 2014:

- Business executives give the efficiency and transparency of border administration (pervasiveness of undocumented extra payments or bribes connected with imports and exports) in Vietnam a score of 4 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'non-transparent' and 7 'transparent').

The World Bank: Corruption from the Perspective of Citizens, Firms and Public Officials 2013:
- Approximately 25% of the surveyed public officials identify customs administration as the most corrupt sector.

- 30% of the surveyed firms identify customs administration as the most corrupt sector.

- Approximately 22% of the surveyed citizens identify customs administration as the most corrupt sector.

Business Corruption

According to the Investment Climate Statement 2013, more than half of surveyed foreign investors in Vietnam pay a commission when participating in public bids. The Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index 2013 shows that grand corruption by top officials (such as kickbacks on procurement contracts) has increased over time, and a significant number of surveyed companies report paying bribes or giving gifts to win government contracts. Moreover, the same index also mentions that medium-sized companies are significantly more likely to pay bribes when bidding on government procurements.

See more under Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives.

Political Corruption

According to Doing Business in Vietnam 2013, public procurement in Vietnam is a multi-layered decision-making process that often lacks efficiency and transparency. The Investment Climate Statement 2013 reports that collusion between officials and bidders in the form of kickbacks is a common problem. The Vietnamese government has joined the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST) pilot programme to enhance accountability and transparency within the sector. A multi-stakeholder group (MSG) has been established and oversees implementation of CoST initiatives. See CoST Vietnam's (in Vietnamese) website for more information.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2013-2014:
- Business executives give the diversion of public funds to companies, individuals or groups due to corruption a score of 3.2 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'very common' and 7 'never occurs').

- Business executives give the favouritism of government officials towards well-connected companies and individuals when deciding upon policies and contracts a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'always show favouritism' and 7 'never show favouritism').

Ernst & Young Fraud Survey Report 2013: 
- 26% of business executives perceive the use of bribery as a necessary practice to win contracts.

Political Corruption

According to a July 2013 Voice of Vietnam article, the Prime Minister requested diverse agencies to review land, minerals, forest and water resource usage so as to immediately deal with any inappropriate practices. The article reports that areas of land and water surface being used unproductively or unlawfully, as well as those left unexploited, are to be reclaimed by the agencies. Furthermore, to ensure cost-effective use of resources and environmental protection, the PM also directed the agencies to tighten control over the grant of licences and activities in exploiting natural resources and minerals.

• Government Strategies: The Embassy of Denmark in Vietnam is assisting provincial administrations to increase the monitoring and evaluation of public administration reforms. Vietnam has a draft for the National Strategy for the Fight Against Corruption Towards 2020. The strategy mainly focuses on increasing transparency of policies, budgets and information about the operation of the government, as well as a gradual disclosure of public assets and public officials' incomes. Emphasis is also put on strengthening anti-corruption agencies and their power to investigate corruption. The Chief Government Inspector has announced that the first phase of the national strategy will focus on land management, finance and banking, and equitisation of private companies. Vietnam has committed to the goals of the ADB & OECD Anti-Corruption Initiative for Asia-Pacific Anti-Corruption Action Plan for Asia and the Pacific, which focuses on building sustainable, legal and institutional frameworks to fight corruption. The American Chamber of Commerce reports that the authorities and media have made commendable improvements in 'Supporting Active Public Involvement' (pillar one) by exposing and condemning cases of corruption. It is also acknowledged that the government has taken various measures in relation to 'Strengthening Anti-Bribery Actions and Promoting Integrity in Business Operation' (pillar two) by removing and punishing corrupt officials.

• Anti-Corruption Agency: The Office of the Steering Committee for Anti-Corruption (OSCAC) is mandated to coordinate, examine and supervise the fight against corruption and has the right to suspend deputy ministers and officials holding equivalent posts. According to Global Integrity 2011, there is a lack of impartiality within the OSCAC, since it consists of members who are full-time officials in other agencies. As a result, there are concerns that some corruption cases are not being investigated properly. Global Integrity 2011 reports also that citizens and anti-corruption activists are afraid of reporting corruption cases to OSCAC due to physical abuse and threats.

• Government Inspectorate (GI): The GI has been the main anti-corruption institution in Vietnam for years and also functions as the ombudsman, receiving citizen complaints and denunciations. It is charged with investigating cases of corruption and has an anti-corruption department. However, it does not have powers to prosecute and must pass corruption cases on to the People's Procuracy (see below) for them to be prosecuted. In cooperation with donors, the GI has conducted a study of Vietnamese anti-corruption legislation and its compatibility with the requirements outlined in United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). According to Global Integrity 2011, inspection reports of the GI are not always publicly available, and the content of these reports is not always comprehensive. One of the latest anti-corruption initiatives, in cooperation with the World Bank, is the launch of the Vietnam Anti-Corruption Initiative Programme (VACI) 2014. According to a World Bank 2013 press release, the programme will focus on the implementation of innovative ideas at the grassroots level to increase transparency, integrity and accountability.

• People's Procuracy: The People's Procuracy is in charge of prosecuting cases of corruption. It is mandated to initiate public prosecution following investigations and to ensure implementation of the law. It is organised into the Supreme People's Procuracy at the national level, with lower-level bodies at the provincial and district levels. The People's Procuracy also investigates and prosecutes offences committed by judicial officials and handles complaints and denunciations of judicial decisions, as reported by Global Integrity 2011.

• State Audit Office of Vietnam (SAV): The SAV is the supreme audit institution in Vietnam. The SAV refers directly to the National Assembly and is responsible for certifying the accuracy and legality of the state budget at all levels of government. Danida and GIZ are both involved in a programme to strengthen the capacity of the SAV. Nevertheless, Global Integrity 2011 reports that the SAV is not independent from the state party, and the government does not always act on SAV’s findings. Access a description of the SAV's mandate and legal foundation.

• E-Governance: According to Doing Business in Vietnam 2013, to increase national competitiveness, Vietnam is focusing on modernisation of administrative systems and the role of e-governance. Most ministries, as well as provincial and municipal governments, have setup websites that contain a wide range of information. Some electronic public services, such as e-business registrations and e-customs declarations are now provided by several central and local offices. Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi have launched online business service agencies. The Hanoi Ministry of Planning and Investment and the Ho Chi Minh Department of Planning and Investment sites are designed to serve as first points of contact for potential investors, particularly foreign investors. The sites provide detailed information including recent news, related laws, regulations and licences, and travel information. According to the Vietnam Provincial Competitiveness Index 2013, one-stop shops, which have been established across the country, have already had a positive impact on waiting periods for business registrations and other formalities. Examples of such provincial one-stop shops are Daklak Business and Investment Information Portal and the Dong Nai Department of Planning and Investment. For general information, news and details on ministries as well as central and local governments, see the official Government Web Portal.

• Public Procurement: Global Integrity 2011 reports widespread conflicts of interest in the procurement sector, which the government is addressing within the existing anti-corruption and Tendering Law 2005 framework. The Anti-Corruption Law 2005 and the Law on Bidding 2005 are the main legal frameworks regulating the disclosure of procurement information. The Law on Public Procurement was passed by the National Assembly in November 2013 and will take effect in July 2014. Ministries in Vietnam operate their own procurement standards. The Department for Public Procurement under the Ministry of Planning and Investment is responsible for administering the Tendering Law 2005, developing mandatory standard bidding documents, reviewing all bids and maintaining the procurement database, including blacklisted companies. The Vietnam Sustainable Development Center and the Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion Center at the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry has an online bidding portal named dgMarket Vietnam (in Vietnamese), which is a local version of the global dgMarket databank of procurement opportunities. The bidding portal helps foreign contractors seek tenders in Vietnam and presents opportunities for Vietnamese organisations and companies to find tenders in Vietnam and abroad. Open competitive bidding is the official bidding method in Vietnam, but irregularities exist. The Transformation Index 2014 reports that the overall transparency of the public procurement system is still low in Vietnam, and very few companies have a code of conduct or programmes to ensure integrity in the procurement process. 

• CoST Vietnam (in Vietnamese): CoST Vietnam is a subset of the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST), a voluntary multi-stakeholder initiative designed to be applicable to any country and to any government department or agency with responsibility for public-sector construction projects. CoST aims to promote the concepts of transparency and accountability in the construction sector and focuses specifically on public disclosure of information. The ultimate aim is to enhance the accountability of procuring bodies and construction companies for the cost and quality of public-sector construction projects. 

• Whistleblowing: Although the Anti-Corruption Law 2005 and the Law on Complaints and Denunciations offer some protection for whistleblowers, like anononymity, Global Integrity 2011 states that in practice neither private sector employees nor civil servants who report cases of corruption are protected from retaliation. According to the same source, there is no internal complaint mechanism for public sector corruption; however, civil servants, private companies and the public can send complaints and denunciations to the Government Inspectorate (in Vietnamese). On a positive note, according to a 2012 article by Vietnam News, the revised Anti-Corruption Law provides stronger provisions, which include strengthening mechanisms to protect whistleblowers.