Ordinance Amending Ordinance on Procedures for the Arrest of Seagoing Ships, Ordinance on Procedures for the Arrest of Aircraft, No. 08/2025/UBTVQH15

ORDINANCE

Amending and Supplementing a Number of Articles of the Ordinance on Procedures for the Arrest of Seagoing Ships, the Ordinance on Procedures for the Arrest of Aircraft, the Ordinance on the Order and Procedures for People’s Courts to Consider and Decide on the Sending of Drug Addicts Aged between Full 12 Years and under 18 Years to a Compulsory Drug Rehabilitation Facility, the Ordinance on the Administrative Sanctioning of Acts of Obstructing Litigation Activities, the Ordinance on the Order and Procedures for Considering and Deciding on the Application of Administrative Handling Measures at People’s Courts, and the Ordinance on Litigation Costs^[1]

Pursuant to the Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, which has a number of articles amended and supplemented under Resolution No. 203/2025/QH15;

Pursuant to Law No. 34/2024/QH15 on Organization of People’s Courts, which has a number of articles amended and supplemented under Law No. 81/2025/QH15;

Pursuant to Law No. 15/2012/QH13 on Handling of Administrative Violations, which has a number of articles amended and supplemented under Law No. 54/2014/QH13, Law No. 18/2017/QH14, Law No. 67/2020/QH14, Law No. 09/2022/QH15, Law No. 11/2022/QH15, and Law No. 56/2024/QH15;

The National Assembly Standing Committee promulgates the Ordinance Amending and Supplementing a Number of Articles of Ordinance No. 05/2008/UBTVQH12 on Procedures for the Arrest of Seagoing Ships, Ordinance No. 11/2010/UBTVQH12 on Procedures for the Arrest of Aircraft, Ordinance No. 01/2022/UBTVQH15 on the Order and Procedures for People’s Courts to Consider and Decide on the Sending of Drug Addicts Aged between Full 12 Years and Under 18 Years to a Compulsory Drug Rehabilitation Facility, Ordinance No. 02/2022/UBTVQH15 on the Administrative Sanctioning of Acts of Obstructing Litigation Activities, Ordinance No. 03/2022/UBTVQH15 on the Order and Procedures for Considering and Deciding on Applying Administrative Handling Measures at People’s Courts, and Ordinance No. 05/2024/UBTVQH15 on Litigation Costs.

Article 1. To amend and supplement a number of articles of the Ordinance on Procedures for the Arrest of Seagoing Ships

To amend and supplement Article 3 as follows:

“Article 3. Jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of seagoing ships

1. The regional People’s Court of the locality where the seaport or inland waterway port (below collectively referred to as the port) in which the ship requested to be arrested is operating is located has the jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of that ship to secure the settlement of maritime complaints, the enforcement of civil judgments, and the implementation of judicial entrustment of foreign courts.

In case a port has many wharves located in different communes, wards and special zones under the territorial jurisdiction of different regional People’s Courts, the regional People’s Court of the locality where the wharf in which the seagoing ship requested to be arrested is operating is located has the jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of that ship.

2. The People’s Court that is handling the civil case, or regional People’s Court of the locality where the Arbitration Panel that has accepted to resolve the dispute is based, has the jurisdiction to decide on the application of the temporary emergency measure to arrest seagoing ships.

3. The Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court shall consider and decide on the Court that has the jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of a seagoing ship in case of a dispute over jurisdiction between regional People’s Courts in the same province.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court shall consider and decide on the Court that has the jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of a seagoing ship in case of a dispute over jurisdiction between regional People’s Courts in different provinces and cities.”.

Article 2. To amend and supplement a number of articles of the Ordinance on Procedures for the Arrest of Aircraft

1. To amend and supplement Article 3 as follows:

“Article 3. Jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of aircraft

The regional People’s Court of the locality where the airport or airdrome in which the aircraft requested to be arrested lands is located, has the jurisdiction to decide on the arrest of that aircraft.”;

2. To replace some phrases in a number of articles as follows:

a/ To replace the phrase “prescribed in Clause 4, Article 96 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement” in Clause 2, Article 31, with the phrase “prescribed in the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement”;

b/ To replace the phrase “prescribed in Article 2 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement” at Point a, Clause 1, Article 32, with the phrase “prescribed in the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement”;

c/ To replace the phrase “prescribed in Article 105 of the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement” in Clause 3, Article 41, with the phrase “prescribed in the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement”.

Article 3. To amend and supplement a number of articles of the Ordinance on the Order and Procedures for People’s Courts to Consider and Decide on the Sending of Drug Addicts Aged between Full 12 Years and Under 18 Years to a Compulsory Drug Rehabilitation Facility

1. To amend and supplement Article 3 as follows:

“Article 3. Jurisdiction to consider and decide on sending to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. The Court that has the jurisdiction to consider and decide on sending to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility is the regional People’s Court of the locality where the proposed person resides, or where the violation is committed in case the proposed person’s place of residence is unidentifiable.

2. The People’s Court of the province or city (below referred to as the provincial-level People’s Court) has the jurisdiction to review the decision of the regional People’s Court that is subject to a complaint, recommendation or protest.”.

2. To amend and supplement Article 16 as follows:

“Article 16. Termination or suspension of consideration and decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. The Judge shall issue a decision to terminate the consideration and decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility when there is one of the following grounds:

a/ The proposed person does not fall into one of the cases specified in Clause 1, Article 33 of the Law on Drug Prevention and Combat;

b/ The proposed person has died;

c/ The proposed person has lost civil act capacity;

d/ The Chief of the commune-level public security agency withdraws the proposal;

dd/ The proposed person is serving an imprisonment sentence or awaiting to serve an imprisonment sentence according to a court judgment or decision that has taken legal effect;

e/ The proposed person is serving, or awaiting to serve, the administrative handling measure of sending to a reformatory, is serving, or is awaiting to serve, the judicial measure of education at a reformatory according to a court judgment or decision that has taken legal effect;

g/ The proposed person is suffering a serious illness, with a certificate from a medical examination and treatment establishment at the basic or higher level.

2. The Judge shall decide to suspend the consideration and decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility when there is one of the following grounds:

a/ The proposed person has committed a violation and is subject to examination for penal liability or is being considered for serving the administrative measure of sending to a reformatory;

b/ New circumstances arise regarding the health or mental conditions of the proposed person and it is necessary to request the Chief of the commune-level public security agency to solicit an assessment;

c/ A force majeure event occurs, making it impossible to hold the meeting to consider and decide to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

d/ The proposed person is seriously ill, with a certificate from a medical examination and treatment establishment at the basic or higher level.

3. When one of the grounds for the suspension specified in Clause 2 of this Article no longer exists, the Court shall consider reopening the meeting according to this Ordinance.”.

3. To amend and supplement Article 25 as follows:

“Article 25. Sending of court decisions

1. Within 2 working days from the date of announcement of the decision, the Court that has issued the decision to send or not to send a person to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall send the decision to the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the proposed person and his/her parents or guardian or legal representative, the same-level People’s Procuracy and concerned agencies.

2. Within 2 working days from the date of announcement of the decision, the Court that has issued the decision to terminate or suspend the consideration and decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall send the decision to the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the proposed person and his/her parents or guardian or legal representative, the same-level People’s Procuracy and other related persons.”.

4. To amend and supplement Articles 29 and 30 as follows:

“Article 29. Receipt and acceptance of written proposals for postponement of or exemption from serving decisions to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. Within 2 working days after receiving the written proposal and accompanying documents, the Court shall accept and assign a Judge to consider and resolve it, and, at the same time, notify in writing the person filing the proposal, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency and the same-level People’s Procuracy.

2. Within 3 working days after being assigned, the Judge shall consider and make a decision; when necessary, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency and the same-level People’s Procuracy shall provide written opinions before the Court makes a decision.

3. After examining the dossier attached to the written proposal to postpone or exempt from serving the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, the Judge shall make one of the following decisions:

a/ Decision to approve the written proposal;

b/ Decision to reject the written proposal.

4. The decision to postpone or exempt from serving the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility must have the following main contents:

a/ Code, and date of issuance, of the decision;

b/ Name of the Court issuing the decision;

c/ Full name of the Judge;

d/ Full name of the person filing the proposal;

dd/ Full name of the Chief of the commune-level public security agency;

e/ Full name, date of birth, place of residence, occupation, and educational level of the person proposed to postpone or exempt from serving the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

g/ Reasons and grounds for issuing the decision;

h/ Contents of the postponement of or exemption from serving the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

i/ Responsibilities of the agencies, organizations and individuals implementing the decision;

k/ Effect of the decision;

l/ Recipients of the decision.

5. The decision to postpone or exempt from serving the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall take effect on the date of expiration of the time limit for complaints, recommendations and protests specified in Article 37 of this Ordinance and shall, within 2 working days from the date of its issuance, be sent to the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the person who is forced to serve the decision and his/her parents or guardian or legal representative, and the same-level People’s Procuracy.

Article 30. Cancellation of decisions to postpone the serving of decisions to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. When the conditions for postponing the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility no longer exist or the person entitled to the postponement continues to use drugs or there is a ground to believe that he/she has absconded, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency of the locality where the person entitled to the postponement resides shall send a written notice to the Court that has issued the decision.

2. Within 3 working days after receiving the written notice from the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the Court shall consider canceling the postponement decision and forcing the person entitled to the postponement to serve the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility.

3. The decision to force the serving of the decision to send to compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall take effect immediately, and shall, within 2 working days from the date of its issuance, be sent to the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the person who is forced to serve the decision and his/her parents or guardian or legal representative, and the same-level People’s Procuracy.

4. The decision to force the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility must have the following main contents:

a/ Code, and date of issuance, of the decision;

b/ Name of the Court issuing the decision;

c/ Full name, date of birth, place of residence, occupation, and educational level of the person to be sent to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

d/ Reasons and grounds for issuing the decision;

dd/ Contents of the cancellation of the postponement decision and forcing of the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

e/ Responsibilities of the agency, organization or individual implementing the decision;

g/ The right to complain about the decision;

h/ Effect of the decision;

i/ Recipients of the decision.”.

5. To amend and supplement Articles 32, 33 and 34 as follows:

“Article 32. Competence to propose the suspension or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. If a person who is serving the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility falls into one of the cases specified in Article 31 of this Ordinance, he/she may be suspended or exempted by the Court from serving the remaining duration of the decision, based on the proposal of the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility.

2. The Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall send a dossier of proposal for the suspension or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility to the regional People’s Court of the locality where the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility is located. The dossier must comprise:

a/ A copy of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

b/ Supporting documents for one of the cases specified in Article 31 of this Ordinance;

c/ The written proposal of the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility.

Article 33. Receipt and acceptance of dossiers of proposal for suspension of or exemption from serving the remaining duration of decisions to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. Within 2 working days after receiving a dossier of proposal for suspension of or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, the Court shall accept and assign a Judge to consider and resolve the case, and, at the same time, send a written notice thereof to the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility and the same-level People’s Procuracy.

2. Within 3 working days after being assigned, the Judge shall consider and make a decision; when necessary, the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility and the same-level People’s Procuracy shall give written opinions before the Court makes a decision.

3. After examining the dossier of proposal for suspension of or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, the Judge shall make one of the following decisions:

a/ Decision to approve the proposal;

b/ Decision to reject the proposal.

4. The decision on suspension of or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility must have the following main contents:

a/ Code, and date of issuance, of the decision;

b/ Name of the Court issuing the decision;

c/ Full name of the Judge;

d/ Full name, date of birth, place of residence, occupation, and educational level of the person serving the decision;

dd/ Full name of the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility making the proposal;

e/ Reasons and grounds for issuing the decision;

g/ Contents of the suspension of or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision;

h/ Responsibilities of the agencies, organizations and individuals implementing the decision;

i/ The right to complain about the decision;

k/ Effect of the decision;

l/ Recipients of the decision.

5. The decision on suspension of or exemption from serving the remaining duration of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall take effect on the date of expiration of the time limit for filing complaints, recommendations and protests specified in Article 37 of this Ordinance and shall, within 2 working days from the date of its issuance, be sent to the person serving the decision and his/her parents or guardian or legal representative, the People’s Court issuing the decision, the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, and the same-level People’s Procuracy.

Article 34. Cancellation of decisions to suspend the serving of decisions to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility

1. When the conditions for suspending the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility no longer exist or the person entitled to the suspension continues to use drugs or there is a ground to believe that he/she has absconded, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency of the locality where that person resides shall send a written notice thereof to the Court that issued the decision.

2. Within 3 working days after receiving the written notice from the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the Court shall consider canceling the suspension decision and forcing the person entitled to the suspension to serve the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility.

3. The decision to force the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall take effect immediately and shall, within 2 working days from the date of its issuance, be sent to the person who is forced to serve the decision and his/her parents or guardian or legal representative, the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, and the same-level People’s Procuracy.

4. The decision to order the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility must have the following main contents:

a/ Code, and date of issuance, of the decision;

b/ Name of the Court issuing the decision;

c/ Full name, date of birth, place of residence, occupation, and educational level of the person to be sent to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

d/ Reasons and grounds for issuing the decision;

dd/ Contents of the cancellation of the suspension decision and forcing of the serving of the decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility;

e/ Responsibilities of agencies, organizations and individuals implementing the decision;

g/ The right to complain about the decision;

h/ Effect of the decision;

i/ Recipients of the decision.”.

6. To amend and supplement Clause 2, Article 36 as follows:

“2. The Chief of the commune-level public security agency who has made the proposal may file a recommendation, the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility who has made the proposal may file a recommendation, and the same-level People’s Procuracy may file a protest against a court decision to send to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility when there is a ground to believe that the decision is illegal.”.

7. To amend and supplement Clause 2, Article 37 as follows:

“2. The time limit for filing a recommendation by the Chief of the commune-level public security agency or by the Head of a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, or for filing a protest by the same-level People’s Procuracy is 5 working days from the date the Court announces the decision; in case the Court does not hold a meeting and issues a decision against which the filing of a recommendation or protest is allowed under this Ordinance, the time limit for filing such recommendation or protest is 5 working days from the date of receipt of the Court’s decision.”.

8. To amend and supplement Clause 2, Article 38 as follows:

“2. The Chief of the commune-level public security agency or the Head of a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall file a recommendation and the same-level Procuracy shall file a protest in writing, clearly stating the reasons and grounds for filing the recommendation or protest, and send it to the Court that has considered and decided to send a person to the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility.”.

9. To amend and supplement a number of clauses of Article 39 as follows:

a/ To amend and supplement Clause 1 as follows:

“1. Within 2 working days after receiving the written complaint, recommendation or protest, the regional People’s Court that has considered and decided to send a person to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility shall send the complaint, recommendation or protest together with the dossier to the competent provincial-level People’s Court for consideration and settlement; and shall, at the same time, notify in writing the complaint, recommendation or protest to related individuals and agencies and the same-level People’s Procuracy.”;

b/ To amend and supplement Clause 4 as follows:

“4. The meeting to consider and settle a complaint, recommendation or protest shall be participated by the following persons:

a/ The complainant or his/her legal representative;

b/ The Chief of the commune-level public security agency or an authorized person, or the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility or an authorized person;

c/ The Procurator of the same-level People’s Procuracy;

d/ When necessary, the Court shall force an expert witness, an interpreter, a translator, a medical, psychological, education or sociological specialist, a representative of the school where the proposed person learns, a representative of the commune-level People’s Committee, representatives of the commune-level Vietnam Fatherland Front Committee and its member organizations in the locality where the proposed person resides, or other persons to attend the meeting.”.

10. To amend and supplement Clause 3, Article 40 as follows:

“3. The meeting proceedings shall be conducted as follows:

a/ The Judge announces the opening of the meeting;

b/ The Judge explains the rights and obligations of the participants in the meeting. In case there is a request to replace the judge or the meeting secretary, the Judge shall consider it; if there is a ground specified in Article 11 of this Ordinance, the meeting shall be adjourned and such adjournment shall be reported to the Chief Justice of the Court for consideration and decision. If the judge or meeting secretary has to be replaced but there is no replacing judge or secretary, the meeting shall be adjourned. The adjournment of the meeting must comply with Clause 4, Article 20 of this Ordinance;

c/ The complainant or his/her legal representative presents the complaint; the Chief of the commune-level public security agency or the authorized person or the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility or the authorized person presents the recommendation; or the Procurator presents the protest;

d/ The proposed person or his/her legal representative presents opinions and arguments on related issues with the Chief of the commune-level public security agency or the authorized person or the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility or the authorized person, or the representative of the Procuracy in case the Procuracy files a protest;

dd/ The expert witness, medical, psychological, educational or sociological specialist, representative of the school where the proposed person learns, representative of the commune-level People’s Committee, representatives of the commune-level Vietnam Fatherland Front Committee and its member organizations in the locality where the proposed person resides or other persons participating in the meeting present opinions to clarify issues related to the content of the complaint, recommendation or protest;

e/ The Procurator presents his/her opinion on the legality of the acts and decisions of the Court, agencies, organizations and individuals in considering the complaint, recommendation or protest in accordance with this Ordinance.”.

11. To amend and supplement Article 42 as follows:

“Article 42. Contents and effect of decisions to resolve complaints, recommendations or protests

1. The decision to resolve a complaint, recommendation or protest must have the following main contents:

a/ Code, and date of issuance, of the decision;

b/ Name of the Court issuing the decision;

c/ Full name of the Judge and Secretary of the meeting;

d/ Full name of the Procurator participating in the meeting;

dd/ Full name of the complainant;

e/ Full name of the Chief of the commune-level public security agency filing the recommendation, full name of the authorized person (if any) or full name of the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility filing the recommendation, full name of the authorized person (if any); or the Procuracy filing the protest;

g/ Contents of the complaint, recommendation or protest;

h/ Reasons, grounds and contents of the resolution of the complaint, recommendation or protest;

i/ Effect of the decision;

k/ Recipients of the decision.

2. The decision to resolve a complaint, recommendation or protest shall take effect immediately.

Within 2 working days from the date of announcement of the decision, the Court shall send it to the agencies and individuals specified in Article 25 of this Ordinance and to the Court that issued the decision subject to the complaint, recommendation or protest, and to the Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility.

3. Decisions on resolution of complaints, recommendations or protests and documents and papers in the process of considering and resolving complaints, recommendations and protests shall be recorded and archived in accordance with law.”.

12. To amend and supplement a number of clauses of Article 47 as follows:

a/ To amend and supplement Clause 1 as follows:

“1. Complaints about the conduct of judges and court clerks shall be resolved by the Chief Justice of a regional People’s Court within 3 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint; if disagreeing with the resolution result, the complainant has the right to further file a complaint with the competent provincial People’s Court. Within 5 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint, the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court shall consider and resolve it. The decision of the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court shall take legal effect.

Complaints about the conduct of the Chief Justice of a regional People’s Court shall be resolved by the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court within 5 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint. The decision of the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court shall take legal effect.”;

b/ To amend and supplement Clause 3 as follows:

“3. Complaints about the conduct of the Chief Justice of a provincial-level People’s Court shall be considered and resolved by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court within 3 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint. The decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court shall take legal effect.”.

13. To replace some phrases in a number of articles as follows:

a/ To replace the phrase “Head of the Labor, Invalids and Social Affairs Division” in Article 8; Clause 1, Article 9; Clause 1, and Point d, Clause 2, Article 12; Clauses 1, 3 and 4, Article 15; at Point c, Clause 2, Article 17; in Clause 2, Article 18; Clause 1, Article 20; at Points c, d and g, Clause 4, Article 21; in Article 22; and Clause 5, Article 23, with the phrase “Chief of the commune-level public security agency”;

b/ To replace the phrase “district level” at Point a, Clause 1, and Point a, Clause 2, Article 27; and Clause 1, and Point a, Clause 2, Article 31, with the phrase “basic level”;

c/ To replace the phrase “district-level People’s Court” in Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10, Article 41, with the phrase “regional People’s Court”.

Article 4. To amend and supplement a number of articles of the Ordinance on the Administrative Sanctioning of Acts of Obstructing Litigation Activities

1. To amend and supplement Clause 3, Article 6 as follows:

“3. The fine-imposing competence of the persons specified in Articles 25 and 25a applies to acts of obstructing litigation activities committed by individuals; their competence to impose fines on organizations is twice as high as that for individuals.”.

2. To amend and supplement Clauses 2 and 3, Article 25 as follows:

“2. The Chief Justice of a regional People’s Court, the Chief Justice of a specialized tribunal of a provincial-level People’s Court, and the Chief Justice of a regional Military Court have the powers:

a/ To issue a warning;

b/ To impose a fine of up to VND 7,500,000;

c/ To confiscate exhibits and means used in administrative violations, with a value not exceeding twice the fine level specified at Point b of this Clause.

3. The Chief Justice of a provincial-level People’s Court and the Chief Justice of an Appellate Tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court have the powers:

a/ To issue a warning;

b/ To impose a fine of up to VND 40,000,000;

c/ To confiscate exhibits and means used in administrative violations;

d/ To apply the remedial measures speecified at Points a, b, c, e, g and h, Clause 1, Article 7 of this Ordinance.”.

3. To add Article 25a below Article 25 as follows:

“Article 25a. Sanctioning competence of Procuracies

1. Procurators and investigators have the powers:

a/ To issue a warning;

b/ To impose a fine of up to VND 1,000,000;

c/ To confiscate exhibits and means used in administrative violations, with a value not exceeding twice the fine level specified at Point b of this Clause.

2. The Chief Procurator of a regional People’s Procuracy and the Chief Procurator of a regional Military Procuracy have the powers:

a/ To issue a warning;

b/ To impose a fine of up to VND 7,500,000;

c/ To confiscate exhibits and means used in administrative violations, with a value not exceeding twice the fine level specified at Point b of this Clause.

3. The Chief Procurators of provincial-level People’s Procuracies, the Director of the Prosecution and Appellate Trial Supervision Office, and the Chief Procurators of the Military Procuracies of military regions or the equivalent have the powers:

a/ To issue a warning;

b/ To impose a fine of up to VND 40,000,000;

c/ To confiscate exhibits and means used in administrative violations;

d/ To apply the remedial measures specified at Points a, b, c, e, g and h, Clause 1, Article 7 of this Ordinance.

4. The Head of the Investigation Agency of the Supreme People’s Procuracy and the Head of the Investigation Agency of the Central Military Procuracy have the powers:

a/ To issue a warning;

b/ To impose a fine of up to VND 40,000,000;

c/ To confiscate exhibits and means used in administrative violations;

d/ To apply the remedial measures specified in Clause 1, Article 7 of this Ordinance.”.

4. To add Article 25b below Article 25a as follows:

“Article 25b. Sanctioning and enforcement competence of other positions

1. The competence to sanction administrative violations and apply remedial measures of the chairpersons of the People’s Committees at all levels specified at Point a, Clause 1 and the title holders who are competent persons within the People’s Public Security, Border Guard, Coast Guard, Customs, Forestry and Forest Protection, and Fisheries and Fisheries Resources Surveillance forces specified at Point h, Clause 1, Article 37a of the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations for acts of obstructing litigation activities must comply with the Government’s regulations.

2. The title holders specified in Clause 1 of this Article have the competence to sanction administrative violations and apply remedial measures within the scope of their assigned management, functions, tasks and powers, and according to their powers prescribed by the Government for acts of violation prescribed in this Ordinance.

3. Persons with competence to sanction administrative violations, who are the chiefs or heads of the agencies and units specified in Clause 1 of this Article, have the competence to issue decisions for enforcing the decisions to sanction administrative violations.”.

5. To amend and supplement a number of clauses of Article 33 as follows:

a/ To amend and supplement Clause 2 as follows:

“2. The Chief Justices of regional People’s Courts and the Chief Justices of specialized tribunals of provincial-level People’s Courts may impose sanctions for the acts of obstructing litigation activities specified in Articles 11 and 12; Clauses 1 and 2, Article 13; Article 14; Clause 1, Article 15; Articles 16 and 17; Clauses 1 and 2, Article 18; Article 19; Clause 1, Article 21; Clause 1, Article 22; Clauses 1, 2 and 3, Article 23; and Article 24, of this Ordinance.”;

b/ To amend and supplement Clause 4 as follows:

“4. The Chief Justices of provincial-level People’s Courts and the Chief Justices of the Appellate Tribunals of the Supreme People’s Court may impose sanctions for the acts of obstructing litigation activities specified in Articles 11 thru 24 of this Ordinance.”.

6. To add Article 33a below Article 33 as follows:

“Article 33a. Determination of the sanctioning competence of Procuracies

1. Procurators and investigators may impose sanctions for the acts of obstructing litigation activities specified in Article 11; Clause 1, Article 13; and Clauses 2 and 3, Article 18, of this Ordinance.

2. The Chief Procurators of regional People’s Procuracies and the Chief Procurators of regional Military Procuracies may impose sanctions for the acts of obstructing litigation activities specified in Clauses 1 and 2, Article 9; Clause 1, Article 10; Article 11; Clause 1, Article 12; Clauses 1, 2 and 3, Article 13; Article 14; Clauses 1 and 2, Article 15; and Clauses 1, 2 and 3, Article 18, of this Ordinance.

3. Chief Procurators of provincial-level People’s Procuracies, the Director of the Prosecution and Appellate Trial Supervision Office, the Chief Procurators of the Procuracies of military regions and the equivalent, the Head of the Investigation Agency of the Supreme People’s Procuracy, and the Head of the Investigation Agency of the Central Military Procuracy may impose sanctions for the acts of obstructing litigation activities specified in Articles 9 thru 15 of this Ordinance.”.

7. To amend and supplement Article 41 as follows:

“Article 41. Determination of sanctioning competence

1. Persons with sanctioning competence in the People’s Courts have the competence to impose sanctions according to Articles 25 and 33 of this Ordinance for acts of obstructing litigation activities from the time the People’s Courts receive and accept the cases or matters.

2. Persons with sanctioning competence in the Military Courts have the competence to impose sanctions according to Articles 25 and 33 of this Ordinance for:

a/ Acts of obstructing litigation activities from the time the Military Courts receive and accept the cases;

b/ Acts of obstructing litigation activities during the stage of processing information about crimes, prosecution and investigation by competent agencies and persons in the Investigation Agencies in the People’s Army and agencies in the People’s Army assigned to conduct a number of investigative activities, except the Border Guard and the Coast Guard forces.

3. Persons with sanctioning competence in the Procuracies have the competence to impose sanctions as specified in Articles 25a and 33a of this Ordinance for:

a/ Acts of obstructing litigation activities during the stage of processing information about crimes, prosecution investigation by competent agencies and persons in the Procuracies and Investigation Agencies of the Procuracies;

b/ Acts of obstructing litigation activities during the stage of prosecution by competent agencies and persons in the Procuracies.

8. To amend and supplement Clause 3, Article 43 as follows:

“3. Persons with the competence to write records of acts of obstructing litigation activities of agencies and persons with investigation powers in the People’s Public Security, People’s Army, Border Guard, Coast Guard, Customs, Forestry and Forest Protection, and Fisheries and Fisheries Resources Surveillance forces include:

a/ Persons with sanctioning competence specified in Clause 1, Article 25b of this Ordinance;

b/ Investigators assigned to handle cases and matters;

c/ Investigator officers performing official duties and tasks;

d/ People’s Public Security soldiers performing official duties and tasks;

e/ Other competent persons in the People’s Public Security, People’s Army, Border Guard, Coast Guard, Customs, Forestry and Forest Protection, and Fisheries and Fisheries Resources Surveillance forces who are performing official duties and tasks.”.

9. To amend and supplement Clause 2, Article 45 as follows:

“2. Persons with competence to issue enforcement decisions include:

a/ The Chief Justices of regional People’s Courts, the Chief Justices of provincial-level People’s Courts, the Chief Justices of regional Military Courts, the Chief Justices of the Military Courts of military regions and the equivalent, and the Chief Justices of the Appellate Courts of the Supreme People’s Court;

b/ The Chief Procurators of regional People’s Procuracies, the Chief Procurators of provincial-level People’s Procuracies, the Chief Procurators of the Procuracies of military regions and the equivalent, the Director of the Prosecution and Appellate Trial Supervision Office, the Head of the Investigation Agency of the Supreme People’s Procuracy, and the Head of the Investigation Agency of the Central Military Procuracy.”.

10. To annul Articles 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 and 40.

Article 5. To amend and supplement a number of articles of the Ordinance on the Order and Procedures for Considering and Deciding on the Application of Administrative Handling Measures at People’s Courts

1. To amend and supplement Article 3 as follows:

“Article 3. Jurisdiction to consider and decide on the application of administrative handling measures

1. The jurisdiction of regional People’s Courts to consider and decide on the application of administrative handling measures is specified as follows:

a/ The regional People’s Court of the locality where the agency of the person proposing the application of administrative handling measures (below referred to as the proposing person) is headquartered, except the case specified at Point b of this Clause;

b/ The regional People’s Court of the locality where the person proposed to be subject to administrative handling measures has committed a violation, in case the proposing person is the Chief of the commune-level public security agency as specified in Clause 2, Article 99; Clause 1, Article 100; Clause 3, Article 101; or Clause 1, Article 102, of the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations.

2. The People’s Court of a province or city (below referred to as provincial-level People’s Court) has the jurisdiction to review the decisions of regional People’s Courts that are subject to complaints, recommendations or protests.”.

2. To amend and supplement Clause 6, Article 28 as follows:

 “6. The decision to reduce the term, suspend or exempt from the serving of the remaining duration of the period of applying the administrative handling measure shall take legal effect on the date of expiration of the time limit for filing complaints, recommendations or protests specified in Article 32 of this Ordinance, during which no complaints, recommendations or protests are filed, and shall, within 2 working days from the date of its issuance, be sent to the person specified in Clause 3, Article 112 of the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, and the same-level Procuracy.”.

3. To amend and supplement a number of clauses of Article 29 as follows:

a/ To amend and supplement Clauses 1 and 2 as follows:

“1. When the conditions for postponing the serving of the decision to apply administrative handling measures no longer exist or the person entitled to the postponement or suspension falls into one of the cases specified in Clause 2, Article 113 of the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations, the Chief of the commune-level public security agency of the locality where that person resides shall send a written notice thereof to the Court that issued the decision.

2. Within 1 working day after receiving the written notice from the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the Chief Judge of the Court that issued the decision on the postponement or suspension shall assign a judge to consider and resolve the case. Within 2 working days after being assigned, the judge shall consider and decide to cancel the decision on the postponement or suspension and force the person concerned to serve the decision to apply administrative handling measures.”;

b/ To amend and supplement Clause 4 as follows:

“4. The decision to force the serving of the decision to apply administrative handling measures shall take legal effect and shall be enforced immediately, and shall, within 2 working days from the date of its issuance, be sent to the Chief of the commune-level public security agency, the same-level People’s Procuracy, the person who is forced to serve the decision, and concerned agencies.”.

4. To amend and supplement Clause 1, Article 34 as follows:

“1. Within 2 working days after receiving the written complaint, recommendation or protest, the regional People’s Court that issued the decision in question shall send the written complaint, recommendation or protest together with the dossier to the competent provincial-level People’s Court for consideration and resolution; and, at the same time, notify in writing of the complaint, recommendation or protest to related individuals and agencies and to the same-level People’s Procuracy.”.

5. To amend and supplement a number of clauses of Article 42 as follows:

a/ To amend and supplement Clause 1 as follows:

“1. Complaints about the conduct of Judges and Clerks of a regional People’s Court shall be resolved by the Chief Justice of the regional People’s Court within 3 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint; if disagreeing with the resolution result, within 3 working days after receiving the decision resolving the complaint from the Chief Justice of the regional People’s Court, the complainant may further file a complaint with the competent provincial-level People’s Court. Within 5 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint, the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court shall consider and resolve it. The decision of the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court is final.

Complaints about the conduct of the Chief Justice of a regional People’s Court shall be resolved by the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court within 5 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint. The decision of the Chief Justice of the provincial-level People’s Court is final.”;

b/ To amend and supplement Clause 3 as follows:

“3. Complaints about the conduct of the Chief Justice of a provincial-level People’s Court shall be considered and resolved by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court within 5 working days from the date of receipt of such a complaint. The decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court is final.”.

6. To replace some phrases in a number of articles as follows:

a/ To replace the phrase “district level” at Point h, Clause 1, Article 16, with the phrase “basic level”;

b/ To replace the phrase “province or centrally run city” in Clause 9, Article 23, with the phrase “province or city”;

c/ To replace the phrase “commune-level People’s Committee” in Clause 6, Article 27, with the phrase “Chief of commune-level public security agency”;

d/ To replace the phrase “Director of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility” in Clauses 1 and 2, Article 28, with the phrase “Head of the compulsory drug rehabilitation facility”;

dd/ To replace the phrase “district-level People’s Court” in Articles 36 and 44, with the phrase “regional People’s Court”.

Article 6. To amend and supplement a number of articles of the Ordinance on Litigation Costs

To amend and supplement Clause 1, Article 8 as follows:

“1. A person who encounters a force majeure event making him/her not to have sufficient assets to make an advance payment for on-site examination and appraisal costs, an advance payment for expert assessment costs; on-site examination and appraisal costs, or expert assessment costs, with the certification by the commune-level People’s Committee of the locality where that person resides, may have such advance payment reduced.”.

Article 7. Implementation provisions

1. This Ordinance takes effect on July 1, 2025.

2. From July 1, 2025:

a/ For cases of arrest of seagoing ships and aircraft falling under the jurisdiction of the regional People’s Courts that are being handled by the provincial-level People’s Courts before the effective date of this Ordinance but have not yet been completely resolved, they shall be handled as follows:

In case the provincial-level People’s Court has received the written application but has not yet accepted it, it shall transfer the case to the regional People’s Court with territorial jurisdiction for settlement;

In case the provincial-level People’s Court has accepted the written application before the effective date of this Ordinance but has not yet completely resolved it, that Court shall continue to handle it;

b/ Based on their territorial jurisdiction, regional People’s Courts shall take over the tasks of reviewing and deciding on the application of administrative handling measures at the People’s Courts, sending drug addicts aged between full 12 years and under 18 years to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility, imposing administrative sanctions for acts of obstructing litigation activities that are currently handled by district-level People’s Courts; and decisions applying administrative handling measures at the People’s Court, decisions sending drug addicts aged between full 12 years and under 18 years to a compulsory drug rehabilitation facility that are issued by district-level People’s Courts but have been cancelled, for reconsideration and settlement;

c/ The Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court shall take over the task of resolving complaints under the jurisdiction of superior People’s Courts;

d/ Based on their territorial jurisdiction, the Chief Justices of regional People’s Courts shall take over the task of resolving complaints under the jurisdiction of the Chief Justices of district-level People’s Courts;

dd/ For cases involving acts of obstructing litigation activities under the sanctioning jurisdiction of the People’s Procuracies as prescribed in this Ordinance, if they are being handled by persons with sanctioning competence in the Military Courts or the People’s Public Security forces and have not yet been resolved by July 1, 2025, they shall continue to be handled.

3. The Government, the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court, and the Procurator General of the Supreme People’s Procuracy shall organize the implementation of this Ordinance.-

This Ordinance was adopted on June 27, 2025, by the Standing Committee of the 15^th National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

On behalf of the National Assembly Standing Committee
Chairman of the National Assembly
TRAN THANH MAN