Do we dare to be transparent?

We have many laws and decrees related to transparency. However, in reality, implementing them is extremely difficult, and sometimes even invalidated.

Recently, many incidents have occurred that have had a significant impact on the country's development, partly due to lack of transparency in information. Here, the author is not talking about security and defense issues, areas that need to be protected, and information that must be kept secret. But many areas that have nothing to do with national security secrets are also... "secret".

Transparency - indicator of development

In fact, there has been exploitation, in the name of “internal affairs”, “business secrets”, “state secrets”… to cover up matters that are heavily influenced by group interests, personal interests. Project “bidding”, bidding for equipment purchases, purchasing machinery and materials, even appointments, selecting officials… are all kept secret.

Transparency is considered an indicator of development and democratic living. In practice, where there is transparency, there is no room for lies and taking advantage of loopholes for personal gain.

We have many laws and decrees related to transparency. However, in reality, implementing them is extremely difficult, and sometimes even invalidated.

For example, the Anti-Corruption Law. Corruption is the most painful area in today's society, one of the four risks that can ruin the country's development path. This reality shows that transparency in public procurement, capital construction; use of budget finance; in equitization of state-owned enterprises, in management of state-owned enterprises... is an indispensable requirement in state management.

Then there's the matter of declaring personal assets.

But what is the reality? The statement “corruption remains stable” is not a joke but the truth.

Asset declaration is said to be transparent and a breakthrough in anti-corruption law, a correct policy but in practice it has not had much success.

The work of organizing cadres and the process of appointing cadres are considered very strict, a breakthrough, but in reality, there are national assembly delegates who have come up with a rhyme (or verse) that makes you laugh: The input is as rotten as soy sauce/ The output quality is equivalent to the input. Recent violations in the cadre stage when investigated, in the end, the announcement to society still only has one refrain: Following the process.

The process is correct, but the leadership quality is so poor, all the losses are huge.

Why is it difficult to be transparent?

So what makes it difficult for some correct policies of the Party and State to be put into practice? The policy of transparency is ineffective in some areas?

First of all, it is necessary to see that information is a special commodity. If in the military, information is the element of victory "know the enemy, know yourself, and you will win a hundred battles", then it seems that this motto has spread to every corner of life. It suddenly becomes a treasure to win, so it must be kept "secret".

Next is the matter of holding information for personal gain. Only officials have this information. Information such as projects, bidding, upcoming roads, urban areas... even appointments, positions... In the context of the request-grant mechanism, it is even more necessary to keep it secret. You run, I give, you ask, I give and no one knows, it is even more necessary to be "secret".

In bidding, secrecy is a rule for all members, which is also… transparency. The mistake is that it is secret to one person but not to another, leading to the phenomenon of bid collusion, which is a land for profiteering, making money, and not being transparent.

Third, information is swapped and distorted. This can be said to be quite common. Policies and guidelines are correct but in practice they are very different. They all find ways to neutralize or distort them. For example, the policy of transparency in real estate assets is correct but in reality it is distorted. The assets belong to the husband and father, but the wife and children are in their names.

We do not have sanctions to check the use of relatives and family members to buy and register. Also because we cannot control the "root" of the money flow, state management is always bypassed. This is an urgent reform but the banking system has not been able to do it.

And the field of power and position-buying is still a problem, if not the leading danger today. It distorts society, prevents development, causes people to be divided, and talented people to lack motivation. It is time to have other appropriate processes, demonstrating transparency in selection, and organizing cadres to reflect the true value of talent and true qualities.

In many countries, leaders have the right to decide on personnel, but they must also take full responsibility for their appointments, which is transparency. In our case, personnel work is done by the Party Committee. It is said to be democratically discussed, but in reality, it is still the leaders who make the decisions. However, when there are violations, individual responsibility cannot be assigned, but collective responsibility. This becomes a hiding place for violations, which is also not transparent.

Finally, the danger of information opacity is the ground for forces to exploit. According to the law, when there is no official information, the enemy will immediately take advantage and steer it in another direction. Therefore, in the flat world, the problem is not to hide information but to be transparent, only then can stability be created, people trust, share and agree.

According to Vietnamnet.vn