On the afternoon of October 2, continuing the agenda of its 7th session, the National Assembly Standing Committee deliberated on the draft Law on Promulgation of Legal Documents.
Each issuing authority to issue only one type of legal normative document
Presenting the proposal for the Law on Legal Normative Documents at the meeting, Minister of Justice Hoang Thanh Tung stated that the draft Law aims to further institutionalize the Party's guidelines on reforming the processes of law-making and implementation; promptly address practical difficulties and obstacles arising from the drafting and issuance of legal normative documents; enhance the effectiveness of implementing such documents; and ensure closer integration between law-making and law implementation.
The draft Law comprises 10 chapters and 68 articles, regulating the drafting and issuance of legal normative documents as well as key aspects of their implementation.
Notably, the draft Law implements the policy of streamlining the system of legal normative documents by stipulating that each issuing authority may issue only one type of legal normative document. It categorizes documents into five groups; matters falling under the jurisdiction of these authorities are to be addressed via the appropriate document type as prescribed by the draft Law, with transitional provisions included to prevent any legal gaps.
The draft Law also reforms the processes for drafting laws and ordinances by further distinguishing between policy formulation and the actual drafting process, while ensuring continuity and the utilization of results across stages.
The draft does not mandate a formal policy appraisal step; instead, it replaces this with a mechanism for soliciting opinions and requiring the mandatory participation of relevant Ministries and ministerial-level agencies—within their respective sectors and fields—in a manner similar to the appraisal process. To simplify and streamline documentation, the draft Law stipulates that policy dossiers and drafting dossiers be structured so that documents carry over between stages, with a primary focus on policy impact assessment; impact assessment reports must be updated whenever policies change, serving as the basis for drafting, appraisal, review, and consideration for promulgation.
Concurrently, the draft Law refines the processes for reviewing, considering, passing, and promulgating laws and ordinances. It allows for the consideration and passing of draft laws over one or multiple sessions to accommodate significant bills with broad regulatory scope. It also improves regulations requiring the submitting agency to proactively study and incorporate review comments and feedback from the National Assembly Standing Committee (NASC) when presenting bills to the National Assembly, thereby enhancing the submitting agency's accountability.
The draft Law refines expedited procedures and the processes for drafting and promulgating legal documents in special cases. It introduces mechanisms to address urgent or emergency issues when the National Assembly cannot convene—modeled after the mechanism in Resolution No. 206/2025/QH15—and establishes comprehensive, specific regulations for promulgating legal documents that pilot policies in the form of laws, decrees, and resolutions of provincial-level People's Councils.
It also improves regulations regarding documents detailing implementation, other assigned contents, administrative procedures, effective dates, and the principles governing general versus specialized legal norms.
Finally, the draft Law provides comprehensive regulations on law implementation, ensuring a link between the drafting and promulgation of laws and their actual implementation, while adding requirements to evaluate implementation effectiveness and policy responses. At the same time, it stipulates the application of digital technology and digital transformation, as well as the use of large legal databases, in law-making and the organization of law implementation.Reviewing to ensure the accuracy of the hierarchy of legal document validity
Presenting the preliminary review report, Phan Chi Hieu, Chairman of the Committee on Law and Justice, stated that the Standing Committee on Law and Justice, along with other National Assembly bodies, concurs with the necessity of comprehensively amending the Law.
The content of the draft Law is fundamentally consistent with the Party's guidelines and policies; it ensures constitutionality, legality, and the coherence of the legal system, while remaining compatible with relevant international treaties.
The majority of opinions within the reviewing body support maintaining the draft Law's scope of regulation largely as it is in the current Law and agree with the title "Law on Promulgation of Legal Documents" to ensure brevity and comprehensiveness.
According to the reviewing body, the content of the draft Law fundamentally ensures constitutionality, legality, and the coherence of the legal system.
During the discussion, the National Assembly Standing Committee highly commended the Government and the Ministry of Justice for their prompt, proactive, and active efforts in researching and preparing the draft Law's dossier, ensuring both quality and regulatory compliance.
The draft Law meets the requirements for submission to the National Assembly for consideration and approval at the upcoming session. The National Assembly Standing Committee endorsed the scope of regulation and the title of the Law as proposed by the Government and agreed with many of the draft Law's fundamental contents.
To further refine the draft Law for submission to the National Assembly, the Standing Committee requested that the Government and the Ministry of Justice incorporate the feedback provided by the Committee and meeting delegates, ensuring the Law meets the dual requirements of fostering development and effectively managing the country's economic, cultural, and social life. At the same time, emphasis is placed on digital transformation and database development regarding the drafting, promulgation, monitoring, systematization, and review of legal documents, as well as the organization of law implementation.
Regarding specific issues, the National Assembly Standing Committee (NASC) concurs with the proposal to eliminate certain forms of legal normative documents—specifically Resolutions of the National Assembly, Resolutions of the NASC, Resolutions of the Government, Decisions of the President, and Joint Resolutions. This move aims to institutionalize the requirements set forth in the Politburo’s Conclusion No. 09-KL/TW on simplifying the legal system, adhering to the principle that each competent authority should issue only one type of legal normative document.
However, the NASC also recommends including provisions to clarify that the content of such eliminated documents remains legally binding and enforceable, and that legal instruments may still be used to amend legal normative documents when necessary.
While fundamentally agreeing with the addition of regulations on the hierarchy of legal validity, the NASC suggests further review to ensure the accuracy of the hierarchy for certain documents.
Simultaneously, consideration should be given to adding principles for the application of law in cases where documents share the same level of legal validity but—having been issued by different authorities—contain conflicting provisions on the same issue.
Regarding the National Assembly's annual legislative program, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly proposed further refining the processes for formulating, adopting, and adjusting the program. This should be done by aligning with and building upon the legislative agenda set for the term, while retaining the requirements for policy appraisal and impact assessment for necessary laws.
In his remarks addressing the feedback during the session, Minister of Justice Hoang Thanh Tung stated that the drafting agency would fully incorporate the comments and continue reviewing the draft to ensure the regulations are stable, feasible, and of high quality.
The law-making process must be rigorous yet flexible enough to meet practical needs; application criteria must be clear to prevent divergent interpretations, while the responsibilities of heads of agencies and accountability obligations must be explicitly defined.