Legal Reasoning and the Rise of Judicial Authority in Vietnam

Abstract Judges in Vietnam have increasingly been called upon by the state and society to resolve new social and economic problems. However, the expansion of judicial authority presents a problem for Vietnam’s authoritarian government, which wants courts that can resolve social problems without challenging state interests. This study draws on empirical research to explore whether judges in Vietnam’s authoritarian polity can harness legal reasoning to extend their authority. It uses a novel theoretical framework based on systems theory to understand how judges determine who is entitled to benefit from the law, which norms are appropriate to particular cases, and how such norms might direct them to reach decisions. Data from case studies and interviews with judges reveal that courts in Vietnam are increasingly using legal reasoning to manage the interaction between legal and extralegal norms, which is a decision-making process with the potential to expand judicial authority over socially significant disputes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Law & Social Inquiry
Published
2025-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2025.10121
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Legal Reasoning and the Rise of Judicial Authority in Vietnam

John Gillespie, Hong Thi Quang Tran, Ha Do Thi Hai
Law & Social Inquiry
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
article

Legal Reasoning and the Rise of Judicial Authority in Vietnam

John Gillespie, Hong Thi Quang Tran, Ha Do Thi Hai
article en

Abstract

Abstract Judges in Vietnam have increasingly been called upon by the state and society to resolve new social and economic problems. However, the expansion of judicial authority presents a problem for Vietnam’s authoritarian government, which wants courts that can resolve social problems without challenging state interests. This study draws on empirical research to explore whether judges in Vietnam’s authoritarian polity can harness legal reasoning to extend their authority. It uses a novel theoretical framework based on systems theory to understand how judges determine who is entitled to benefit from the law, which norms are appropriate to particular cases, and how such norms might direct them to reach decisions. Data from case studies and interviews with judges reveal that courts in Vietnam are increasingly using legal reasoning to manage the interaction between legal and extralegal norms, which is a decision-making process with the potential to expand judicial authority over socially significant disputes.

Law & Social Inquiry
The University of Melbourne (AU), Parliament of Australia (AU), Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute (AU), Ho Chi Minh City University of Law (VN), Monash University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Legal Reasoning and the Rise of Judicial Authority in Vietnam — John Gillespie, Hong Thi Quang Tran, et al. · Law & Social Inquiry (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS