Editor’s Note: The final session of Vietnam’s 15th National Assembly concluded with a record number of laws on digital systems being passed. Observers have called it the “session of the digital era.” Among them, the Law on Digital Transformation is regarded as a foundational statute governing core issues such as the legal validity of digital data, digital assets, and regulatory sandboxes for technology policy experimentation. Right after the law was passed, The Saigon Times spoke with Mr. Tran Duy Ninh, director general of the National Digital Transformation Department (Ministry of Science and Technology), at a time when it is crucial for citizens and businesses to grasp the true spirit of digital transformation.

The right to “refuse paper documents”

The Saigon Times: At a recent workshop, you shared a view on the newly passed Law on Digital Transformation: “Processes must be optimized before digital transformation.” This is a very logical perspective, because otherwise we would merely be “digitizing a mess.” Could you elaborate on this point and explain whether the new law contains provisions that require ministries, agencies and local authorities to follow this spirit? – Mr. Tran Duy Ninh: This is not merely a technical requirement, but a core mindset of the Law on Digital Transformation, reflecting the philosophy of substantive transformation initiated by Minister of Science and Technology Nguyen Manh Hung: “In digital transformation, transformation comes first, digitalization comes second.” Article 31 of the law clearly stipulates that processes must be restructured and standardized before being brought into the digital environment. We need to clearly distinguish between earlier applications of information technology, which essentially meant performing old tasks using old processes on computers, and digital transformation, which fundamentally changes ways of working and governance processes based on data and technology. If any unit simply “lifts” a cumbersome paper-based process into the digital environment, that is not digital transformation but merely creates technological chaos. Although the law does not yet specify concrete sanctions, it lays the groundwork for further research and detailed regulations in laws governing civil servants and public employees, as well as related legislation, to ensure feasibility. The Politburo’s Resolution 57-NQ/TW on breakthroughs in the development of science, technology, innovation and national digital transformation sets the goal that state management must operate seamlessly in the digital environment. You have also emphasized that “digital transformation must be the nation’s mode of operation,” not just a matter of equipping machines or slogans. So, is it possible to have a roadmap to “switch off” paper-based procedures—meaning that at some point, citizens and businesses would have the right to refuse submitting paper documents, and authorities would no longer be allowed to demand them? – The Law on Digital Transformation is designed precisely to address this issue. The law establishes the principle of “declare once by default” (Articles 6 and 7). It creates a solid legal corridor: state agencies are not allowed to request citizens to resubmit information or data that the State already possesses (Article 31). This is essentially the citizen’s right to “refuse paper documents” for data that have already been digitized, connected, interoperable, shared and usable. By codifying these principles, administrative procedures will by default be fully online, unless otherwise stipulated by law. Paper documents will gradually be eliminated not through mere administrative orders, but through the readiness of digitized data that are connected, interoperable and shared among state agencies—something this law mandates. Given these principle-based provisions, state agencies will develop roadmaps to provide fully online public services in compliance with sector-specific laws, actual conditions and practical feasibility. Data must “come alive” to become real assets of the economy We often speak of digital transformation alongside innovation, but the boundary between “trial and error” and accountability for “causing losses to the state budget” is often blurred. Resolution 57 has opened a significant pathway by calling for policies on “liability exemption” for risks in technology experimentation. Has this spirit been codified in the Law on Digital Transformation? Is it sufficient to serve as a “shield” protecting researchers and pioneers who conduct such experiments from legal risks? And does this conflict with other laws? – In my view, this is a “hot” issue, and the Law on Digital Transformation has addressed it. We acknowledge that many digital transformation projects are “without precedent”—a type of project that has been extremely difficult to handle for many years. The law specifically designs a pilot development phase, allowing the use of a separate budget and special mechanisms to test solutions within a limited scope. This is precisely the “legal shield” protecting pioneer teams. We allow experimentation and accept risks within a permitted framework in order to identify the right approach before making large-scale investments. When the regulations are properly complied with, technological risks (if any) will be exempted from or excluded from liability in accordance with laws on science, technology and innovation, laws on the digital technology industry, laws on data, and other relevant legislation. This fully reflects the spirit of Resolution 57 in promoting creativity and the willingness to think boldly, act boldly and take responsibility among officials and civil servants in the development of science, technology, innovation and digital transformation. The law is drafted in a way that connects and cross-references other sector-specific laws, ensuring there is no conflict and maintaining coherence within the legal system. Resolution 57 regards data as a “primary factor of production” and calls for the establishment of “data exchanges.” But for data to be traded, it must be valued. At present, however, there is no mechanism for valuing data as public assets. Does the Law on Digital Transformation remove this bottleneck? Looking ahead, could a national database be valued and used for capital contribution or as collateral like a genuine economic asset, or will it continue to sit idle on the servers of ministries and local authorities? – The Law on Digital Transformation is designed as a “framework law.” Its mission is to create a unified connective structure for a digital nation, filling in missing pieces of the digital economy and digital society, without deeply intervening in sector-specific legislation. Therefore, concrete valuation mechanisms will be governed by laws on data, pricing, and public assets. However, the Law on Digital Transformation does remove a critical “bottleneck”: it shifts data from a “closed” and siloed state to one of “connection, sharing and common use.” When data circulates and is reused to generate socio-economic value, demand for valuation—and the mechanisms to support it—will naturally emerge. This law creates a market and a legal corridor for data to “come alive,” rather than lying dormant on servers. That is the most important prerequisite for data to become a real asset of the economy. The 10th session of the 15th National Assembly, which concluded in mid-December 2025, completed the final legal building blocks for the digital space with three “backbone” laws. These include the Law on Digital Transformation, which governs foundational issues such as the legal validity of digital data, digital assets and sandbox regulations; the Law on Artificial Intelligence (AI), making Vietnam one of the first countries to enact a dedicated law on AI governance and development; and the comprehensively revised Law on Cybersecurity, which consolidates and upgrades existing regulations to suit the context of cross-border data flows and AI-enabled cyberattacks. In addition, during 2024–2025, a series of other important sector-specific and supporting laws were also passed, including the amended Law on E-commerce; the amended Law on High Technology; the amended Law on Press, with new provisions on digital content governance and digital media business models; the Law on the Digital Technology Industry; the Law on Data; and the Law on Personal Data Protection, among others.