Brian Jeffrey
The Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court, Le Minh Tri, highlighted the necessity of increasing the number of judges at the Supreme Court. This adjustment is crucial for effectively managing the influx of cassation and retrial cases being transferred from High People’s Courts in a timely manner.
Today, the National Assembly is set to review a proposed law that seeks to amend and supplement various articles within the Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts.
The proposed legislation suggests significant changes to the court system, including the dissolution of High People’s Courts and District People’s Courts, leading to the formation of Regional People’s Courts. Furthermore, specialized first-instance courts will be restructured as specific divisions within these Regional Courts.
The new organizational structure for the courts would feature the Supreme People’s Court, the Provincial/Municipal People’s Courts, and the Regional People’s Courts.
With this revised three-tier system, the Supreme People’s Court will also assume the appellate authority over criminal matters where judgments from provincial courts are challenged or contested, pending legal enforcement.
During discussions on May 8, some deputies questioned why the draft does not allocate cases with sentences over 20 years to the Regional Courts.
In response, Chief Justice Le Minh Tri clarified that provincial courts will continue to manage serious criminal cases, including those subject to long-term imprisonment, life sentences, or the death penalty. This transitional measure is vital as judges in some remote or rural areas may not yet possess the required expertise.
He further stated that as judicial capabilities improve more uniformly, the Supreme People’s Court will evaluate the possibility of extending the jurisdiction of Regional Courts to include all first-instance criminal cases.
Addressing a suggestion from National Assembly deputies regarding the accountability of provincial chief justices before provincial People’s Councils, Le Minh Tri noted that this duty is already mandated by the Law on Oversight Activities of the National Assembly and People’s Councils. Any amendments would rely on future constitutional updates.
In their input on proposed constitutional amendments, the Supreme People’s Court has suggested retaining this accountability for provincial chief justices. The Court will later consider revisions to the Law on Oversight Activities to ensure alignment with the Constitution and to avoid redundancy in current legal requirements.
The proposed law aims to expand the number of judges on the Supreme Court from the current count of 13-17 to a range of 23-27. While this initiative has garnered support from some, others are requesting a more detailed rationale.
Chief Justice Le Minh Tri emphasized that this increase is vital for equipping the Supreme Court to adequately manage the substantial volume of cassation and retrial responsibilities that will arise once the High Courts are dissolved.
Current figures indicate that the Supreme Court and High Courts are processing approximately 11,200 cassation and retrial petitions each year and handle around 1,000 cases annually via these processes.
To effectively manage and decrease the number of cases and petitions requiring cassation and retrial, the Supreme Court plans to introduce several strategies, which include enhancing the quality of first-instance and appellate trials, improving the qualifications and capabilities of judges and judicial staff, and bolstering professional integrity and discipline.
The Supreme Court reiterated its dedication to maintaining rigorous standards during the selection and appointment of new judges to the Supreme Court.
Although the proposal to widen the eligibility for appointments increases the pool of potential candidates, it remains essential that appointees are current judges of the People’s Court who meet or surpass existing legal qualifications and standards.
In particular, candidates eligible under this specific provision must have served as department directors for at least five years, be active judges, and possess substantial expertise in legal practice and adjudication. They should also have significant experience in guiding judicial procedures, developing legal precedents, and ensuring the consistent application of the law during trials.
