In Nghe An province, 63.3% of communes, wards, and towns have not yet met the standards for access to legal services.

Of the 304 communes, wards, and towns that have not yet met the legal access standards, there are 70 Type I communes; 168 Type II communes, and 66 Type III communes. Some mountainous districts have 100% of their communes that have not yet met the legal access standards, such as Ky Son, Que Phong, and Quy Chau...

The women's club participating in protecting border security and sovereignty in Bac Son village (Mo Son commune) organized a thematic meeting on preventing human trafficking. Photo: Hung Phong

The reason is that many communes have not met the 5 component criteria and 4 conditions according to Decision 619/QD-TTg of the Prime Minister, so they have not submitted applications, submitted applications late, or submitted applications but did not meet the requirements, thus not being recognized.

Some communes have not met the standards because some officials were disciplined with a warning or higher penalty during the year. For example, in Dien Chau district, in 2017, 39 out of 39 communes and towns submitted applications to the District People's Committee for recognition as communes meeting legal standards, but only 36 out of 39 communes met the standards for access to law (3 communes, Dien Thanh, Dien Ngoc, and Dien My, did not meet the standards because some officials were disciplined). Similarly, in Do Luong district, 3 out of 33 communes did not meet the standards for access to law, including Giang Son Dong and Tru Son communes, due to officials and civil servants violating regulations and being disciplined.

Officers from the Quỳnh Thuận Border Guard Post directly visited fishing vessels to disseminate legal information. Photo: Hải Thượng

Some localities have achieved less than 80% of the maximum score in the satisfaction assessment of organizations and individuals regarding the quality and attitude of service when carrying out administrative procedures, or have one of the five criteria scoring below 50% of the maximum score. Many communes are far from the central areas, and the implementation of tasks to build communes that meet the standards for access to law is still limited, especially in mountainous areas.

Encouraging people to voluntarily surrender homemade weapons. Photo: Archival material.

In addition, based on practical experience over more than a year of implementation, the Department of Justice has also noted feedback from localities regarding difficulties in applying regulations and guidelines on building and evaluating communes that meet the standards for access to law (central government guidelines do not provide specific guidance on building each criterion, some criteria are difficult to score. Advisory officials do not fully understand the legal provisions).

Human resources and funding for building communes, wards, and towns that meet legal access standards are limited, especially in localities with difficult socio-economic conditions.

On May 8, 2017, the Prime Minister issued Decision No. 619/QD-TTg regulating the construction of communes, wards, and towns that meet the standards for access to law. Simultaneously, it added "communes meeting the standards for access to law" as a component criterion of the National Criteria Set for New Rural Communes in the 2016-2020 period. According to Decision 619, a commune is recognized as meeting the standards for access to law when it satisfies:

- 5 criteria (total points 100) include: Ensuring the implementation of the Constitution and laws (15 points); Implementing administrative procedures under the authority of the commune-level People's Committee (30 points); Resolving administrative procedures in the correct order, procedures, and within the prescribed time limits; Disseminating and educating on the law (25 points); Grassroots mediation (10 points); Implementing grassroots democracy (20 points).

- The four conditions include: No criterion scoring below 50% of the maximum points; the total score for the legal access criteria must be 90% or more of the maximum points for Type I communes, 80% or more of the maximum points for Type II communes, and 70% or more of the maximum points for Type III communes; and during the year, no commune-level officials or civil servants were disciplined with a warning or higher penalty for violating the law in the performance of their duties or had to compensate for damages caused by illegal official actions.