In a charged session of Vietnam’s National Assembly on May 20, 2025, lawmakers grappled with a government proposal to abolish the death penalty for eight of the 18 crimes currently punishable by execution. The draft amendment to the Penal Code, discussed during the 15th National Assembly’s 9th meeting, has ignited fierce debate over judicial reform, public safety, and international integration. As the country navigates its path between humanitarian values and the need for deterrence, the proposal raises profound questions about the balance of justice in a rapidly evolving society.
A Push for Reform
The government’s plan would replace capital punishment with life imprisonment without the possibility of sentence reduction or parole for crimes including national security offenses like espionage and sabotage, as well as high-profile economic and social crimes such as embezzlement, bribery, drug trafficking, and the production of counterfeit medicines. This move is framed as part of Vietnam’s broader judicial reform agenda, reflecting a policy to gradually reduce the application of the death penalty while aligning with international norms. 
Deputy Lê Nhật Thành from Hà Nội emerged as a vocal supporter, arguing that the shift to life imprisonment without commutation is a critical safeguard against wrongful convictions. “When our foreign partners require assurances that the death sentence won’t be enforced, especially in cases involving corruption or drug crimes, our lack of a formal policy often leaves us without support” he said. Thành also highlighted inconsistencies in current sentencing practices, noting that the choice between life imprisonment and execution often lacks nuance, failing to match the severity and consequences of certain crimes.
Beyond procedural concerns, Thành emphasized the humanitarian angle, advocating for exemptions from execution for death-row inmates with terminal illnesses such as late-stage cancer or advanced AIDS. He argued that such measures would not only uphold the right to life but also reduce costs and administrative burdens on the legal system. For Thành, the proposal represents a step toward aligning Vietnam’s justice system with global standards, potentially easing judicial cooperation with nations opposed to capital punishment.
Deterrence vs. Humanity
Not all lawmakers share Thành’s optimism. Deputy Thạch Phước Bình from Trà Vinh Province acknowledged the humanitarian intent behind limiting the death penalty but stressed its importance as a deterrent. Drawing on international examples, he pointed to France and Canada, which abolished capital punishment in 1981 and 1976 respectively, replacing it with life imprisonment but maintaining strict conditions for clemency—often requiring 20 to 30 years of incarceration. Bình also referenced China, which, despite reducing the death penalty for economic crimes since 2011, enforces rigorous sentencing policies to ensure deterrence.
The debate grew particularly heated over drug trafficking, an offense many deputies argued warrants the harshest penalties due to its devastating societal impact. Deputy Nguyễn Hải Trung from Hà Nội opposed removing the death penalty for this crime, stating, “Whether it’s a few grammes or a few tonnes, the harm caused by drug transport is immense.” He urged for more granular sentencing guidelines but insisted that capital punishment remain an option for the most severe cases. Similarly, Deputy Nguyễn Thành Trung from Yên Bái Province highlighted the increasingly sophisticated and transnational nature of drug crimes in Vietnam, cautioning against leniency for repeat offenders or large-scale operations.
HCM City Deputy Nguyễn Thanh Sang echoed these concerns, warning that abolishing the death penalty for drug trafficking could position Vietnam as a transit hub for narcotics. “At a time when drug cases are rising despite existing harsh penalties, this sends the wrong signal” he said. Sang also tied the death penalty to anti-corruption efforts, referencing the high-profile Vạn Thịnh Phát case involving defendant Trương Mỹ Lan. He questioned whether asset recovery in such cases would have been as successful without the looming threat of execution, suggesting that fear of the ultimate penalty often compels cooperation.
Counterfeit Medicines: A New Battleground
One of the most contentious points in the debate centers on the production and sale of counterfeit medicines—a crime not previously punishable by death in Vietnam but now under intense scrutiny. Recent scandals, including a bust in Thanh Hoa City on August 16, 2024, where police detained seven suspects in a fake pharmaceutical ring, have underscored the public health crisis posed by such operations. The scale of these crimes, often targeting the sick and vulnerable, has prompted calls for harsher penalties.
Deputy Nguyễn Thanh Sang described the issue as “not just fraud, but exploitation of the sick and dying.” He advocated for introducing the death penalty as a deterrent for this offense, a stance shared by Deputy Phạm Khánh Phong Lan from HCM City. “If there were signs these crimes were decreasing, we might reconsider. But fake medicines are being discovered with increasing frequency” Lan said. She rejected arguments for leniency on humanitarian grounds, insisting on proportional justice. “For murder, life must be paid with life” she argued, drawing a stark comparison between a negligent doctor harming a single patient and a counterfeit drug operation potentially killing hundreds.
Lan’s position reflects a broader sentiment among some lawmakers that certain crimes—particularly those involving drugs, fake medicines, and corruption—are becoming more severe, rendering the proposed abolition of the death penalty ill-timed. For these deputies, the principle of deterrence outweighs calls for reform, especially when public safety hangs in the balance.
Balancing International Norms and Domestic Realities
The proposed amendments to the Penal Code are not merely a domestic issue; they carry significant implications for Vietnam’s international standing. Supporters like Thành argue that reducing the death penalty aligns with global trends and facilitates judicial cooperation, particularly in extradition cases where foreign partners demand assurances against execution. This perspective ties into Vietnam’s broader push for international integration, as the country seeks to harmonize its legal framework with global human rights standards.
Yet, opponents caution against adopting international norms at the expense of local context. Vietnam faces unique challenges, from rising drug trafficking networks to entrenched corruption and emerging threats like counterfeit medicine production. For many lawmakers, maintaining the death penalty for the most egregious offenses is not just a matter of justice but a necessary tool to protect society from sophisticated criminal enterprises.
The debate also touches on practical considerations. Replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole raises questions about prison capacity, long-term costs, and the psychological impact on inmates facing a lifetime behind bars with no hope of release. While supporters see this as a humane alternative, critics argue it may not deliver the same deterrent effect, particularly for crimes driven by organized networks or financial gain.
Public Sentiment and the Road Ahead
As the National Assembly deliberates, public opinion appears as divided as the lawmakers themselves. While some citizens welcome a move toward a more compassionate justice system, others express concern that leniency could embolden criminals. The reviewing committee has tentatively agreed on a timeline, with the revised Penal Code expected to take effect on July 1, 2025, though further discussions are likely before a final vote.
The outcome of this debate will shape not only Vietnam’s legal landscape but also its identity as a nation striving to balance reform with security. As lawmakers weigh compassion against deterrence, the question remains: will abolishing the death penalty for these crimes mark a progressive leap forward, or will it leave society vulnerable to those who exploit its most pressing weaknesses? For now, Vietnam stands at a crossroads, with the weight of justice hanging in the balance.
