In the Law on Handling Administrative Violations of 2012, the authority of the person who decides on the sanctioning of administrative violations (VPHC), the decision to temporarily detain a person, and the decision on enforcement is delegated to the deputy level when the principal is absent. However, the authority to decide on the inspection of means of transport, objects, to decide on the temporary detention of exhibits, means, documents, etc. is not delegated to the deputy level, causing significant difficulties for the functional agencies in execution.
Article table of contents
In the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations 2012, the authority of individuals making decisions on handling administrative violations (VPHC); making decisions on temporary detention of individuals; making decisions on coercion is conferred to deputies when the primary decision-maker is absent. However, the authority for making decisions on the search of transportation means, objects; and the decision to temporarily seize evidence, means, and documents, etc., is not conferred to deputies.
Therefore, functional agencies encounter many difficulties during implementation, as only the head of the agency is authorized to sign the decision to search transportation means, objects; and the decision to temporarily seize evidence, means, documents, etc. This means that the head of the agency cannot go on business trips, cannot fall ill, and cannot take a leave, etc.
Moreover, there are numerous inadequacies and issues within the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations that enforcement agencies have been proposing amendments to for years.
In the document No. 298-BTP-QLXLVPHC and TDTHPL dated January 28, 2015, from the Ministry of Justice responding to this issue, it also affirms that only the head of the agency has the authority to sign the aforementioned decisions, and it must wait until the 3-year preliminary review of the Law on Handling of Administrative Violations to report to the Government of Vietnam for proposed revisions.
It is perplexing that, during the drafting of this Law, the drafting agency negligently overlooked many regulations that SHOULD and MUST HAVE been included in the LAW, and it is even more perplexing that urgent and obvious difficulties have to wait for a 3-year preliminary review before reporting to propose amendments.
So, when will the Ministry of Justice report and propose amendments to the Law? When will the National Assembly amend this Law? When will the heads of agencies be allowed to fall ill or take leave?
Source: laodong.vn
