The Brief Dawn of an Independent Judiciary in Việt Nam

Sa Huỳnh wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on September 11, 2025. Đàm Vĩnh Hằng translated it into English for The Vietnamese Magazine.

---

Vũ Trọng Khánh and Vũ Đình Hòe are two of the most influential figures in Việt Nam’s 20th-century judiciary. As classmates at the Hà Nội School of Law, they were among the very few in pre-1945 Indochina to hold law degrees. [1] In 1945, they stepped onto the stage of history together, signing the Declaration of Independence and taking on ministerial posts in the newly founded Democratic Republic of Việt Nam.

Together, they aided in designing the young republic and worked to safeguard it during a period of tumultuous upheaval. It was a time of decisive choices about the future of the nation’s judiciary and political system. Sadly, their grand ambitions for an independent judiciary would not be realized. Hòe continued as Minister of Justice until 1960 and helped draft the 1959 Constitution that enshrined Việt Nam’s path to socialism. Khánh, by contrast, was reassigned to insignificant posts and fell silent on the ideals he once championed.

The following is drawn from a series on judicial history (1945–1956) by Nguyễn Lương Hải Khôi, published by the Việt Nam Studies–U.S. Institute at the University of Oregon. [2]

A Fleeting Vision of Judicial Independence

Contrary to the later narrative that a socialist judiciary was Việt Nam’s only path, the country once experienced a brief, remarkable period of independent courts. In the transitional moment of 1945, Provisional President Hồ Chí Minh and his colleagues had the opportunity to design a genuine republic. At the heart of this effort were Vũ Trọng Khánh, the first Minister of Justice, and Vũ Đình Hòe, his eventual successor.

Immediately after the August Revolution, the new government established a Ministry of Justice led by Khánh. On Dec. 1, 1945, he signed Decree No. 37, granting the ministry sweeping powers over nearly all aspects of the legal system, from drafting laws and administering courts to managing prisons—functions later scattered across other state bodies. [3]

Echoing his September 2 declaration in Ba Đình Square that “Việt Nam has the right to enjoy freedom and independence, and in fact has become a free and independent nation,” Hồ Chí Minh signed the foundational Decree No. 13 on Jan. 24, 1946. [4] 

This laid the foundation for an independent judiciary and defined the structure of judicial bodies at all levels, with Article 47 stating unequivocally: “The Judicial Courts shall be independent from administrative agencies. Judges shall obey only the law and justice. Other agencies shall not interfere in judicial affairs.”

To further secure this independence, Hồ Chí Minh issued Decree No. 40 on March 29, 1946, which granted the judiciary the power to annul administrative decisions. [5] 

Article 12 specified: “The appellate council may uphold an administrative committee’s decree, annul it, or order the committee to provide additional evidence or further investigation. If the council annuls the decree, the detained or restricted person must be immediately released.” 

The principle was finally enshrined in Article 69 of Việt Nam’s 1946 Constitution: “In adjudicating cases, judges shall obey only the law; no other agencies may interfere.” [6]

Vũ Trọng Khánh is believed to have been the principal architect of these four key legal documents. However, after failing to win a seat in the National Assembly, he was forced to step down after just six months. Hồ Chí Minh nominated Hòe to succeed him. [7] Though Hòe initially hesitated, rumors of plots to oust Khánh convinced him to “throw himself into the hornet’s nest.” [8]

As the ministry’s second head, Hòe carried on this independent spirit in practice. In his 1948 Report on One Year of Resistance Activity of the Ministry of Justice, he noted that while some local officials abused their wartime power, regional courts had effectively intervened to release unlawfully detained individuals and punish those responsible. [9]

Independence vs. Subordination

It might have seemed that with such strong legal safeguards, the republic’s judiciary would continue to advance independently. Yet, during the grueling war against France, a quieter but equally fierce battle emerged among Việt Nam’s top leaders over a fundamental question: should the judiciary be independent? For a state only a few years old, this was a debate that would define the very nature of its political system.

The first signs of this conflict appeared on Oct. 1, 1947, when Hồ Chí Minh issued Decree No. 91-SL, merging local resistance and administrative bodies into the Resistance-Administrative Committee. [10] This move was designed to consolidate government power for the war effort.

In response, the Ministry of Justice convened the National Judicial Conference from Feb. 25–27, 1948, to clarify its role within this new, centralized structure. But even before the conference began, Hồ Chí Minh sent a directive to the ministry, stressing the need for integration:

“Justice is an important organ of government, therefore it must unite sincerely and cooperate closely with other organs to avoid frictions that may, for petty and private interests, harm the greater common interests of both justice and administration.” [11]

At the conference, Minister Vũ Đình Hòe attempted to walk a fine line. While he accepted oversight from the new committees on general and political matters, he firmly rejected any interference in the judiciary’s “professional domain.” [12] In effect, the ministry’s official resolution was a direct counter to Hồ Chí Minh’s call for complete cooperation, drawing a line in the sand to protect its independence.

The Communist Opposition

The Ministry of Justice’s independent stance foreshadowed a fierce backlash. When direct attempts to subordinate the ministry failed, the battle moved to the press, spearheaded by Quang Đạm (real name Tạ Quang Đệ), an editor at Sự Thật, the official paper of the Communist Party. As the brother of historical figure Tạ Quang Bửu, his writings were understood to reflect the Party’s official line, not just his personal views. [13]

In his analyses, Quang Đạm advanced two key arguments against an independent judiciary. [14]

First, he insisted that the judiciary was simply one branch within the executive apparatus, on par with education, health, or the arts. The state, he argued, was a “machine,” and the law was just one of its many “parts,” meant to serve the whole.

Second, he contended that law must be a tool for class struggle and the construction of a new communist democracy. From this perspective, judicial independence was a dangerous bourgeois concept of the old colonial order, alien to the principles of socialism. He went further, labeling the separation of powers a tool of exploitation once used by the French in Indochina to protect their imperial interests. For Quang Đạm, the only path to true national independence was through the new communist democracy born from the August Revolution.

The Defenders of Independence 

Against Quang Đạm’s ideological offensive, Khánh and Hòe mounted a sharp, principled defense of judicial independence and the republican path.

Drawing from his memoirs, Hòe recalled Khánh’s arguments during their early debates. [15] Khánh strongly rejected the communist view of law as a mere instrument of power. He argued that the judiciary’s purpose was not to serve authority but to uphold justice and protect the weak against the strong. He stressed that an independent Ministry of Justice was essential to shield citizens from abuses of power, even from the government itself. For Khánh, separating the judiciary from the executive was a fundamental requirement for safeguarding citizens’ rights in any true democracy.

Later, as Acting Minister, Hòe took this defense public. In a July 1948 article in Độc Lập newspaper, pointedly titled “Justice in the New Democracy,” he co-opted his opponents’ language to dismantle their claims. [16] He argued that true judicial independence had never existed in Việt Nam before the August Revolution, framing it as a uniquely Vietnamese democratic achievement, distinct from both colonialism and capitalism. Citing the 1946 Constitution, Hòe delivered his most crucial point: that ultimate state power lay in institutions elected by the people, not in the Communist Party.

The Final Decision

The debate over the judiciary’s role lasted until Nov. 9, 1948, when President Hồ Chí Minh issued Decree 254/SL—a document that marked a definitive turning point in the republic’s power structure. [17]

The decree effectively dismantled the judiciary’s independence. Article 22 granted the executive Resistance-Administrative Committees prosecutorial powers equal to the courts, while Article 23 gave them the authority to detain citizens and restrict their movement. Most critically, the judiciary lost its power to order the release of those unlawfully detained; that authority was transferred to the very administrative committees that now held the power of arrest.

With the stroke of a pen, the judiciary ceased to be an independent guardian of justice. It was absorbed into the governing apparatus, and the law became a tool serving political ends. This decree closed the chapter on judicial independence in the Democratic Republic, opening an era of state-controlled “socialist legality.”

Interestingly, while Khánh faded into the background after this defeat, Hòe remained an active political figure, contributing to the construction of the very legal system he had once resisted. [18]

Ultimately, the struggle over judicial independence determined not only the fate of a fledgling legal system but the entire political course of the Democratic Republic of Việt Nam. From that moment in 1948, the nation’s brief history of an independent judiciary had decisively turned a page.