.jpg)
The policy of exempting construction permits in areas already subject to detailed 1/500 planning is raising significant expectations in terms of saving time and costs, eliminating the “ask-and-grant” mechanism, and facilitating convenience for citizens. However, to prevent the risk of unregulated urban development, experts emphasize that planning must be complete and transparent, and post-construction inspection must be genuinely strict.
Expanding the pilot program on construction permit exemptions is essential
In Official Telegram No. 133 recently issued, Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh instructed the Ministry of Construction to coordinate with Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi to review, evaluate the pilot implementation of construction exemptions in areas already subject to detailed 1/500 planning; at the same time, to study the expansion of the scope of application and report to the Government in the fourth quarter.
In practice, the policty of construction permit exemption had already been introduced under Official Telegram No. 78 issued by the Prime Minister on May 29th. At the beginning of August, the Head of Government once again emphasized the need to accelerate administrative reform in the construction sector, particularly in the licensing process.
Immediately after the direction, Ho Chi Minh City moved forward vigorously. As of early August, the HCMC Department of Construction announced that 112 out of 356 individual housing projects qualified for construction permit exemptions. The city also proposed piloting permit exemptions for houses under seven levels and expanding the scope of application to areas with approved detailed planning or urban design. Beyond its current jurisdiction, the Department is also studying the application of the policy in newly annexed areas, namely Binh Duong, Ba Ria – Vung Tau and Con Dao special administrative zone.
According to experts, exempting construction permits in areas already subject to 1/500 planning would help save time and costs, eliminating the “ask-and-grant” mechanism, and thereby create more favorable conditions for citizens in construction investment.
Architect Pham Thanh Tung, Chief of Office of the Vietnam Association of Architects, analyzed that in the past, when management was conducted through traditional methods, withouth digital technology, urban design, or detailed 1/500 planning, the issuance of permits was necessary. However, at present, many areas have already been covered by 1/500 planning; meanwwhile, urban governance capacity remains weak, and inspection efforts are ineffective, resulting in various shortcomings in the permitting process.
He pointed out that although the law requires permits to be issued within 15 days, citizens are rarely served on time. The public of planning is limited, and vague guidance leave citizens unclear about specific criteria such as ground elevation, sidewalk width, setback requirements, etc, and results in disorderly construction, such as ultra-thin or oddly shaped houses along many streets.
“Therefore, reducing and simplifying permit procedures is entirely justified. This represents a breakthrough in transforming the governance system toward serving the people”, he emphasized.
Sharing the view on the necessity of reform, Lawyer Le Cao, Managing lawyer of FDVN Law Firm, stated that construction order in Vietnam remains highly disordered, despite rather strict permitting procedures that impose significant burdens on both regulatory authorities and citizens. Violations in construction, inconsistent architectural designs, and the constant digging up of roads are still widespread. This demonstrates that the current system of construction permitting has failed to achieve its intended effectiveness.
“The problem does not lie in whether permits are issued or not, but rather in the laxity of management and the failure to thoroughly address violations, which renders governance effectiveness virtually nonexistent”, Lawyer Le Cao shared.
According to him, in areas subject to comprehensive planning with clear construction indicators, it is sufficient to disclose information publicly so that citizens can comply, combined with serious post-construction inspections. In such cases, construction order can still be maintained without requiring permits. This approach not only reduces administrative procedures, sparing both state agencies and citizens from expending resources on repititive permits with overlapping content, but also effectively prevens the “ask-and-grant” mechanism and related corrupt practices. Therefore, simplifying permit construction is essential. More importantly, this mechanism should be scaled up to build a more transparent and efficient system of urban governance.
Planning and post-inspection as key factors
While agreeing with the policy of exempting construction permits and supporting the study of expanding its scope of application, experts emphasize that effective implementation requires planning to be fully completed as a fundamental precondition.
Urban planning and design must serve as a clear, transparent and comprehensive “compass”, easy to understand and implement, so that citizens are fully aware of their rights and obligations. Only when one can look at the planning map and immediately determine how many floors a building is permitted to have, the height of each floor, the construction density, and the required setbacks, will citizens proactively comply, and post-inspection authorities be able to perform the functions effectively. However, in reality, many localities still lack complete 1/500-scale planning, and urban design documents are even rare. The disclosure of planning information also remains limited, making it difficult for citizens to access. This gap risks turning permit exemption policy into a form of “unregulated construction” if not addressed in a timely manner.
Lawyer Le Cao noted that Hanoi and HCMC are two urban centers with relatively detailed planning infrastructure, clear technical standards, and strong inspection capacity, making them suitable for piloting a post-inspection and mechanism in lieu of prior control through construction permits. However, such a model cannot be uniformly applied to other localities unless similar conditions are in place.
Moreover, access to planning information in Vietnam remains limited and difficult. Most citizens are either unaware of or unfamiliar with how to obtain planning data and the necessary construction technical indicators. Therefore, before implementing this model, the most important step is to ensure that planning is clear and detailed. At the same time, planning data must be made transparent, and communication efforts should be strengthened to promote public awareness of how to access such information. Only then will citizens be able to conveniently look up and use the data, saving both time and costs, while enhancing the effectiveness of urban governance and construction in line with planning.
“Planning must fully perform its role and be made transparent. A synchronized and transparent database on land, planning, and architecture will encourage citizens to comply voluntarily. Conversely, if data remain fragmented and management processes lack scientific rigor, citizens will struggle to know how to comply properly, leading to violations and making construction order difficult to control,” Lawyer Cao emphasized.
Therefore, expanding the scope of construction permit exemptions is a sound policy, but one with significant impact that requires appropriate piloting and thorough evaluation before full implementation. If rushed, while planning and data systems in many localities remain fragmented and opaque, the policy will hardly achieve its intended effectiveness.
In addition to planning, another key factor is post-inspection. Lawyer Cao stressed that state management must assume full responsibility at this stage. Post-inspection must be conducted in a systematic, transparent, timely, and procedurally correct manner; otherwise, it risks degenerating into a burdensome process, a tool for harassment, or a breeding ground for vested interests. To ensure this, procedures must be standardized, a clear legal framework promulgated, and sufficiently strong sanctions imposed to strictly deal with violations.
“If the permitting procedure is abolished without establishing a simpler, more effective, and more appropriate management process, the outcome will remain the same,” he cautioned.
The policy of exempting construction permits in areas already subject to detailed 1/500 planning is raising significant expectations in terms of saving time and costs, eliminating the “ask-and-grant” mechanism, and facilitating convenience for citizens. However, to prevent the risk of unregulated urban development, experts emphasize that planning must be complete and transparent, and post-construction inspection must be genuinely strict.
Expanding the pilot program on construction permit exemptions is essential
In Official Telegram No. 133 recently issued, Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh instructed the Ministry of Construction to coordinate with Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi to review, evaluate the pilot implementation of construction exemptions in areas already subject to detailed 1/500 planning; at the same time, to study the expansion of the scope of application and report to the Government in the fourth quarter.
In practice, the policty of construction permit exemption had already been introduced under Official Telegram No. 78 issued by the Prime Minister on May 29th. At the beginning of August, the Head of Government once again emphasized the need to accelerate administrative reform in the construction sector, particularly in the licensing process.
Immediately after the direction, Ho Chi Minh City moved forward vigorously. As of early August, the HCMC Department of Construction announced that 112 out of 356 individual housing projects qualified for construction permit exemptions. The city also proposed piloting permit exemptions for houses under seven levels and expanding the scope of application to areas with approved detailed planning or urban design. Beyond its current jurisdiction, the Department is also studying the application of the policy in newly annexed areas, namely Binh Duong, Ba Ria – Vung Tau and Con Dao special administrative zone.
According to experts, exempting construction permits in areas already subject to 1/500 planning would help save time and costs, eliminating the “ask-and-grant” mechanism, and thereby create more favorable conditions for citizens in construction investment.
Architect Pham Thanh Tung, Chief of Office of the Vietnam Association of Architects, analyzed that in the past, when management was conducted through traditional methods, withouth digital technology, urban design, or detailed 1/500 planning, the issuance of permits was necessary. However, at present, many areas have already been covered by 1/500 planning; meanwwhile, urban governance capacity remains weak, and inspection efforts are ineffective, resulting in various shortcomings in the permitting process.
He pointed out that although the law requires permits to be issued within 15 days, citizens are rarely served on time. The public of planning is limited, and vague guidance leave citizens unclear about specific criteria such as ground elevation, sidewalk width, setback requirements, etc, and results in disorderly construction, such as ultra-thin or oddly shaped houses along many streets.
“Therefore, reducing and simplifying permit procedures is entirely justified. This represents a breakthrough in transforming the governance system toward serving the people”, he emphasized.
Sharing the view on the necessity of reform, Lawyer Le Cao, Managing lawyer of FDVN Law Firm, stated that construction order in Vietnam remains highly disordered, despite rather strict permitting procedures that impose significant burdens on both regulatory authorities and citizens. Violations in construction, inconsistent architectural designs, and the constant digging up of roads are still widespread. This demonstrates that the current system of construction permitting has failed to achieve its intended effectiveness.
“The problem does not lie in whether permits are issued or not, but rather in the laxity of management and the failure to thoroughly address violations, which renders governance effectiveness virtually nonexistent”, Lawyer Le Cao shared.
According to him, in areas subject to comprehensive planning with clear construction indicators, it is sufficient to disclose information publicly so that citizens can comply, combined with serious post-construction inspections. In such cases, construction order can still be maintained without requiring permits. This approach not only reduces administrative procedures, sparing both state agencies and citizens from expending resources on repititive permits with overlapping content, but also effectively prevens the “ask-and-grant” mechanism and related corrupt practices. Therefore, simplifying permit construction is essential. More importantly, this mechanism should be scaled up to build a more transparent and efficient system of urban governance.
Planning and post-inspection as key factors
While agreeing with the policy of exempting construction permits and supporting the study of expanding its scope of application, experts emphasize that effective implementation requires planning to be fully completed as a fundamental precondition.
Urban planning and design must serve as a clear, transparent and comprehensive “compass”, easy to understand and implement, so that citizens are fully aware of their rights and obligations. Only when one can look at the planning map and immediately determine how many floors a building is permitted to have, the height of each floor, the construction density, and the required setbacks, will citizens proactively comply, and post-inspection authorities be able to perform the functions effectively. However, in reality, many localities still lack complete 1/500-scale planning, and urban design documents are even rare. The disclosure of planning information also remains limited, making it difficult for citizens to access. This gap risks turning permit exemption policy into a form of “unregulated construction” if not addressed in a timely manner.
Lawyer Le Cao noted that Hanoi and HCMC are two urban centers with relatively detailed planning infrastructure, clear technical standards, and strong inspection capacity, making them suitable for piloting a post-inspection and mechanism in lieu of prior control through construction permits. However, such a model cannot be uniformly applied to other localities unless similar conditions are in place.
Moreover, access to planning information in Vietnam remains limited and difficult. Most citizens are either unaware of or unfamiliar with how to obtain planning data and the necessary construction technical indicators. Therefore, before implementing this model, the most important step is to ensure that planning is clear and detailed. At the same time, planning data must be made transparent, and communication efforts should be strengthened to promote public awareness of how to access such information. Only then will citizens be able to conveniently look up and use the data, saving both time and costs, while enhancing the effectiveness of urban governance and construction in line with planning.
“Planning must fully perform its role and be made transparent. A synchronized and transparent database on land, planning, and architecture will encourage citizens to comply voluntarily. Conversely, if data remain fragmented and management processes lack scientific rigor, citizens will struggle to know how to comply properly, leading to violations and making construction order difficult to control,” Lawyer Cao emphasized.
Therefore, expanding the scope of construction permit exemptions is a sound policy, but one with significant impact that requires appropriate piloting and thorough evaluation before full implementation. If rushed, while planning and data systems in many localities remain fragmented and opaque, the policy will hardly achieve its intended effectiveness.
In addition to planning, another key factor is post-inspection. Lawyer Cao stressed that state management must assume full responsibility at this stage. Post-inspection must be conducted in a systematic, transparent, timely, and procedurally correct manner; otherwise, it risks degenerating into a burdensome process, a tool for harassment, or a breeding ground for vested interests. To ensure this, procedures must be standardized, a clear legal framework promulgated, and sufficiently strong sanctions imposed to strictly deal with violations.
“If the permitting procedure is abolished without establishing a simpler, more effective, and more appropriate management process, the outcome will remain the same,” he cautioned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Articles
- THỦ TỤC CẤP ĐỔI, CẤP LẠI THẺ THƯỜNG TRÚ CHO NGƯỜI NƯỚC NGOÀI TẠI VIỆT NAM / PROCEDURES FOR REPLACEMENT, REISSUANCE OF PERMANENT RESIDENCE CARDS FROM JULY 1, 2026
- LAW SCHOOL FOR EVERYONE BY PROFESSOR EDWARD K.CHENG, JOSEPH L. HOFFMANN, MOLLY BISHOP SHADEL AND PETER SMITH
- HƯỚNG DẪN CÁCH TÍNH ƯU ĐÃI THUẾ THU NHẬP CÁ NHÂN ĐỐI VỚI CHUYÊN GIA, NHÀ KHOA HỌC LÀM VIỆC TRONG LĨNH VỰC KHỞI NGHIỆP SÁNG TẠO / GUIDANCE ON CALCULATING PERSONAL INCOME TAX INCENTIVES FOR EXPERTS AND SCIENTISTS WORKING IN THE FIELD OF INNOVATIVE STARTUPS
- LAW SCHOOL FOR EVERYONE LEGISLATION AND REGULATION BY PROFESSOR PETER J.SMITH
- SINH CON THỨ HAI TỪ NGÀY 01/7/2026: THỜI GIAN NGHỈ VÀ CÁCH TÍNH TIỀN THAI SẢN / SECOND CHILDBIRTH FROM JULY 1, 2026: MATERNITY LEAVE PERIOD AND CALCULATION OF MATERNITY BENEFITS
- LAW SCHOOL FOR EVERYONE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW BY PROFESSOR ERIC BERGER
- TỔNG HỢP TỪ VỰNG VÀ THUẬT NGỮ PHÁP LÝ TIẾNG ANH THÔNG DỤNG DÀNH CHO HÔN NHÂN GIA ĐÌNH
- LAW SCHOOL FOR EVERYONE CONTRACTS BY PROFESSOR DAVID HORTON
- LAW SCHOOL FOR EVERYONE CORPORATE LAW BY PROFESSOR GEORGE S. GEIS
- TỔNG HỢP 08 BẢN ÁN CỦA TOÀ ÁN VƯƠNG QUỐC ANH VỀ TRANH CHẤP LIÊN QUAN ĐẾN DỮ LIỆU CÁ NHÂN / COLLECTION OF 08 UK COURT JUDGMENTS ON DISPUTES RELATING TO PERSONAL DATA
- TỔNG HỢP 12 BẢN ÁN CỦA TOÀ ÁN SINGAPORE VỀ TRANH CHẤP CÔNG NGHỆ VÀ SỞ HỮU TRÍ TUỆ / 12 SINGAPORE COURTS JUDGMENTS ON TECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DISPUTES
- TỔNG HỢP MỘT SỐ MẪU ĐƠN KHỞI KIỆN DÂN SỰ TRÊN THẾ GIỚI / COLLECTION OF CIVIL STATEMENT OF CLAIM TEMLATES FROM OVER THE WORLD
- BỘ TÀI LIỆU HƯỚNG DẪN THỦ TỤC HÀNH CHÍNH VỀ ĐĂNG KÝ QUYỀN TÁC GIẢ, QUYỀN LIÊN QUAN CỦA CỤC CÔNG NGHIỆP VĂN HOÁ VÀ BẢN QUYỀN TÁC GIẢ - BỘ VĂN HOÁ, THỂ THAO VÀ DU LỊCH
- THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PLAYBOOK: POWERS, RESPONSIBILITES AND INTERACTIONS BETWEEN SHAREHOLDERS, BOARD AND MANAGEMENT BY HERMAN, HENRY & DOMINIC
- ĐÀ NẴNG: DOANH NGHIỆP CẦN HOÀN THÀNH KÊ KHAI THÔNG TIN CHỦ SỞ HỮU HƯỞNG LỢI TRƯỚC NGÀY 30/11/2026 THEO CÔNG VĂN 14848/STC-DN&ĐKKD
- BÀI HỌC TIẾNG ANH PHÁP LÝ: APPEAL
