A Quest for Due Process Doctrine in Vietnamese Law: From Soviet Legacy to Global Constitutionalism

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
D. Bui
{"title":"A Quest for Due Process Doctrine in Vietnamese Law: From Soviet Legacy to Global Constitutionalism","authors":"D. Bui","doi":"10.1093/cjcl/cxab009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Due process—the ‘soul’ of a modern constitution—was not seriously taken into account under purely socialist legal systems in general as well as in pre-2013 Vietnamese constitutions in particular. Since the 2013 Constitution, Vietnamese jurisprudence has incorporated the human rights-limitation principle (substantive due process) for the first time and strengthened the application of universal fair trial rights (procedural due process). This constitutional development is the result of the fact that, over the past two decades, the class-based perception of human rights has been increasingly less important and has been almost replaced by universalism. This article claims that, because of the influence of Soviet jurisprudence, the Vietnamese version of due process has been characterized by the fact that human rights could be arbitrarily trumped by public interests and that fair trial rights have been problematically limited to criminal proceedings and almost ignored in non-criminal procedures. This article analyses the importance of, and the challenges involved in, incorporating the human rights-limitation principle into the 2013 Constitution and argues for an extension of fair trial rights to all kinds of criminal, civil, administrative, and mixed procedures in keeping with global constitutionalism.","PeriodicalId":42366,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Journal of Comparative Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Journal of Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cjcl/cxab009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Due process—the ‘soul’ of a modern constitution—was not seriously taken into account under purely socialist legal systems in general as well as in pre-2013 Vietnamese constitutions in particular. Since the 2013 Constitution, Vietnamese jurisprudence has incorporated the human rights-limitation principle (substantive due process) for the first time and strengthened the application of universal fair trial rights (procedural due process). This constitutional development is the result of the fact that, over the past two decades, the class-based perception of human rights has been increasingly less important and has been almost replaced by universalism. This article claims that, because of the influence of Soviet jurisprudence, the Vietnamese version of due process has been characterized by the fact that human rights could be arbitrarily trumped by public interests and that fair trial rights have been problematically limited to criminal proceedings and almost ignored in non-criminal procedures. This article analyses the importance of, and the challenges involved in, incorporating the human rights-limitation principle into the 2013 Constitution and argues for an extension of fair trial rights to all kinds of criminal, civil, administrative, and mixed procedures in keeping with global constitutionalism.
越南法律对正当程序原则的探索:从苏联遗产到全球宪政
正当程序——现代宪法的“灵魂”——在一般纯粹的社会主义法律制度下,尤其是在2013年之前的越南宪法中,没有得到认真考虑。自2013年《宪法》以来,越南判例首次纳入人权限制原则(实质性正当程序),并加强了普遍公平审判权(程序性正当程序的适用)。这一宪法发展的结果是,在过去二十年中,基于阶级的人权观念越来越不重要,几乎被普遍主义所取代。这篇文章声称,由于苏联判例的影响,越南版本的正当程序的特点是,人权可以被公共利益任意凌驾,公平审判权有问题地局限于刑事诉讼,而在非刑事诉讼中几乎被忽视。本文分析了将人权限制原则纳入2013年《宪法》的重要性和挑战,并主张根据全球宪政,将公平审判权扩展到各种刑事、民事、行政和混合程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Chinese Journal of Comparative Law (CJCL) is an independent, peer-reviewed, general comparative law journal published under the auspices of the International Academy of Comparative Law (IACL) and in association with the Silk Road Institute for International and Comparative Law (SRIICL) at Xi’an Jiaotong University, PR China. CJCL aims to provide a leading international forum for comparative studies on all disciplines of law, including cross-disciplinary legal studies. It gives preference to articles addressing issues of fundamental and lasting importance in the field of comparative law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信