ORDINANCE ON "GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY:" POWER TO THE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HANOI 001088 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR EAP/MLS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM PGOV KCOR KPAO SOCI PREL VM SUBJECT: ORDINANCE ON "GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY:" POWER TO THE VILLAGERS? HANOI 00001088 001.2 OF 002 Summary -------------- ¶1. (SBU) The National Assembly recently passed the Ordinance on Grassroots Democracy, which is intended to allow villagers, with local Fatherland Front representatives participating, to convene meetings for the purpose of discussing and proposing solutions to local problems and nominating candidates for local leadership. It also enshrines some transparency in local governance by requiring commune governments to publicize how they raise and spend funds for local economic development projects. Reactions among our contacts to the new ordinance have been mixed, with none heralding the advent of real democracy in Vietnam. That said, with the ordinance, the GVN is trying to improve transparency and accountability at the local level, although the Communist Party will remain inviolate, even at the grassroots. End Summary. Rules Codified in the Ordinance -------------- ¶2. (SBU) The National Assembly's Standing Committee recently passed the Ordinance on Grassroots Democracy, updating and replacing the GVN's 2003 Decree on Grassroots Democracy. (Note: When used by the GVN and the Party, "democracy" is not the ability of the people to freely choose their representatives and leaders, but instead is local and central government accountability to the people. End Note.) The ordinance states that villagers can convene meetings to discuss and propose solutions to local problems, though local Fatherland Front (FF) representatives (the Party's umbrella organization for any and all groups in Vietnam) must participate. Furthermore, locals can nominate and justify candidates for village or commune head and, every two years, can propose confidence votes for people cluster head, village head or commune head. ¶3. (SBU) Problems that cannot be resolved at the village level are bumped up to the commune level, then to the district level if still unresolved. District officials have seven working days to decide whether the complaint -- for example, over a village or commune official's alleged corruption or "abuse of power" -- is valid and disciplinary action is needed. If the district level finds that the complaint is not worthy of further action, villagers can appeal to the provincial level, but must register the complaint within a week of the district's decision. ¶4. (SBU) The ordinance codifies the responsibilities and powers of officials and civil servants related to "the settlement of the affairs of the people." To encourage villager participation in and discussions about commune governance, the ordinance's Article 4 strictly prohibits acts that "victimize people who have complaints, denunciations and recommendations related to the implementation of democracy." However, the ordinance does not discuss disciplinary action for officials who do not comply. Increasing Transparency? -------------- ¶5. (SBU) The ordinance seeks to enshrine some transparency in local governance. It states that commune governments must publicize socio-economic development, land use and regulatory plans and the estimates and accounts of annual commune budgets, as well as the management and use of funds, investment amounts and development aid for programs and projects. Commune governments must also publicize how much money it has "mobilized" via contributions from locals. ¶6. (SBU) The ordinance also gives guidelines on capital loans to "develop production" and alleviate poverty, and defines who is entitled to borrow capital and how that capital is to be disbursed. Commune governments must reveal total fees and other finances collected, in addition to the results of investigations, inspections and the settlement of "negative incidents" such as corruption cases at the commune, village and cluster levels. The ordinance does not specify, however, the types of penalties for local officials who are found to not follow these regulations, leaving sanction decisions up to the whims of local power holders. Improving Local "Democracy?" -------------- ¶7. (SBU) The GVN has touted the ordinance as a "refinement of democracy" at the local level. On June 5, a senior member of the Vietnam Lawyer's Association told Poloff that the ordinance is important because it gives villagers a say in decisions that affect them. On why the GVN promulgated the ordinance at this time, he said that Vietnam faces a different economic, political and social situation compared to just five years ago. With all the changes that have taken place over this time period, it was "appropriate to upgrade" legal documents governing local-level affairs, he said. HANOI 00001088 002.2 OF 002 ¶8. (SBU) However, a well-respected law lecturer told Poloff that the ordinance is not very different from the GVN's 2003 Decree on Grassroots Democracy. In implementing this decree, the GVN had been "pleased with some of its results." For example, commune governments successfully mobilized local resources for economic development projects, he said. ¶9. (SBU) Throughout the three-year lifespan of the original GVN decree, the government held it up as proof of Vietnam's "democratic credentials," the law lecturer continued. In reality, however, the decree did not have much of an impact because the central government was reluctant to disseminate information on the local residents' new rights, he said. He fears that local leaders will behave no differently with the new ordinance. Furthermore, while villagers can convene meetings to discuss issues, they likely will not speak frankly, especially on issues of corruption or other wrongdoing, if a local VFF official also attends, he said. ¶10. (SBU) The law lecturer agreed that it is good that the ordinance lays out the people's rights to put forth and justify candidates for village or commune head and, every two years, to propose confidence votes for people cluster head, village head or commune head. He pointed out, however, that these votes are presided over by the local Fatherland Front representative. When the Fatherland Front will call meetings, and whether it will conduct them in a clear and transparent manner, remain open questions, he said. Local Fatherland Front committee members may just choose not to invite to meetings locals who are not happy with their leaders. ¶11. (SBU) Le Dang Doanh, a leading reform advocate, told Poloff that the ordinance is a "move in the right direction." However, problems that remain to be tackled are whether there are fair procedures in place for putting forth and justifying candidates and decreasing Party intervention in the process. The "producer" will still be able to "orchestrate" local elections, he asserted. Comment -------------- ¶12. (SBU) In issuing the Ordinance on Grassroots Democracy, the GVN is seeking to improve transparency and accountability at the local level and provide villagers avenues to vent some frustration. It remains an open question, however, as to how the ordinance will work in practice. Local-level institutions remain Party-dominated, and another legal document on grassroots democracy does nothing to prevent Party members, or those connected to them, from continuing to play by their own set of rules. End Comment. MARINE