This is the view of National Assembly Deputy Hoang Minh Hieu from Nghe An province, a full-time member of the National Assembly’s Law and Justice Committee, shared in an interview below with VietNamNet about solutions to address institutional bottlenecks, currently seen as the “bottleneck of bottlenecks.”

Judicial reform as pillar of institutional breakthrough

Party Chief To Lam has emphasized that “the institutional regime is the bottleneck of bottlenecks.” Why is an institutional breakthrough needed now, and which areas should be prioritized?

The Party Committee Secretary General has repeatedly stressed that institutional regime is the “bottleneck of bottlenecks” because, among the three strategic breakthroughs identified by the Party—-institutions, infrastructure, and human resources—-institutions serve as the foundation, guiding and shaping the operation of the other two.

Without a transparent, effective, and modern institutional framework, abundant resources and heavy infrastructure investments won’t be fully leveraged. Thus, to gain rapid and sustainable development, institutional bottlenecks must be addressed first.

Despite Vietnam’s great achievements in socio-economic development, certain institutional shortcomings still hinder progress. An institutional breakthrough now is needed urgently to remove barriers and create strong momentum, especially amid digital transformation, green transition, and complex global geopolitical developments.

Priority areas for institutional reform include streamlining and strengthening organizational structures for efficiency and effectiveness; bold measures to advance science, technology, and innovation; and solutions to boost the private economic sector.

Also, I believe judicial reform should also be prioritized. It is critical because an independent, upright, and professional judiciary is a prerequisite for citizens and businesses to trust that their legal rights and interests are protected.

For investors, this is as important as tax incentives or low labor costs. When disputes are resolved quickly, fairly, and transparently, businesses avoid extra costs to secure transactions. This significantly reduces “hidden costs,” a major barrier for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

A professional judiciary also reinforces the law’s consistency, clarity, and predictability. Businesses can assess legal risks, enabling confident long-term strategies. Thus, judicial reform should be considered a core pillar of institutional breakthrough, alongside public governance reform, market improvement, and high-quality human resource development.

Urgent issues 

Lam also stated: “For the nation to rise and develop strongly, we firmly say ‘no’ to any institutional and legal limitations or shortcomings; we do not compromise with any weaknesses in policy design, law drafting, or enforcement.” What is your comment about this?

This statement not only sends a strong message in institutional reform but also a profound reminder of the political, ethical, and professional responsibilities of all subjects involved in lawmaking.

In practice, shortcomings persist in policy planning, drafting, issuance, and enforcement. Some laws are impractical or overly formalistic; some take too long to receive implementation guidelines; and some good regulations lack enforcement mechanisms, preventing laws from taking effect in real life.

These are the issues we cannot compromise on if we want the law to be a tool for development and protection of human and citizen rights.

How should the National Assembly and its deputies change their mindset and actions to ensure legislative work meets new demands, so policies truly “take effect in life,” as the General Secretary emphasized?

To embody this spirit in legislative work, the National Assembly in general, and its deputies in particular, must focus on key requirements.

First, legislative priorities must be clearly defined, focusing on truly urgent issues with great impact in order to have quick and timely policy responses. 

The time for each National Assembly session and term is limited, while legal demands are vast. For instance, the 9th session of this National Assembly has to cover 54 legislative items. Thus, we must select priorities, focusing on urgent issues to address institutional bottlenecks with widespread impact, sparking new growth drivers.

Second, continue studying and innovating legislative thinking. The Politburo’s Resolution No 66/2025 on reforming lawmaking and enforcement to meet the nation’s development needs in the new era clearly outlines requirements for legislative innovation. We believe the most critical issue is enhancing the scientific nature of legislative activities.

Nguyen Thao