Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Legal challenges to combating cybercrime: An approach from Vietnam

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explores the legal challenges of combating cybercrime in Vietnam. We used a legal doctrine method to review the updated Vietnamese legal frameworks, consisting of substantive, procedural, and preventive cybercrime law. We then combined the analysis of four cybercrime cases and in-depth interviews of seven senior police officials to analyse the application of cybercrime law. The main findings reveal that by updating its legal system, Vietnam has shown a determination to prevent and disrupt cybercrime. Despite positive results, Vietnam’s fight against cybercrime still faces legal challenges, including traditional and novel ones. Moreover, active and flexible approaches within Vietnam’s cyberspace management can increase the effectiveness of combating cybercriminal activities; however, they can cause concerns in balancing cybercrime control and human rights protection. These approaches could then constitute a useful case study for other similar situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Internetworldstats. (2020). World Internet usage and population statistics. https://internetworldstats.com/stats.htm#links

  2. Google & Temasek. (2018). e-Conomy SEA 2018: Southeast Asia’s Internet economy hits an inflection point. https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/_qs/documents/6730/Report_e-Conomy_SEA_2018_by_Google_Temasek_v.pdf

  3. McAfee & CSIS. (2018). Economic impact of cybercrime – No slowing down. https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/economic-impact-cybercrime.pdf

  4. Nguyen, T. V. (2020). Cybercrime in Vietnam: An analysis based on routine activity theory. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 14(1), 156–173. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3747516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. HTCP Department. (2010). Bao cao tong ket nam 2010 [Annual report 2010]

  6. HTCP Department. (2013). Bao cao tong ket nam 2013 [Annual report 2013]

  7. HTCP Department. (2014). Bao cao tong ket nam 2014 [Annual report 2014]

  8. Nguyen, T., & Luong, H. T. (2020). The structure of cybercrime networks: Transnational computer fraud in Vietnam. Journal of Crime and Justice, 1–22.https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2020.1818605

  9. Nguyen, T. V. (2021). The modus operandi of transnational computer fraud: A crime script analysis in Vietnam. Trends in Organized Crime. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-021-09422-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Goel, A. (2016). The great cyber game in South China Sea. https://cyware.com/news/the-great-cyber-game-in-south-china-sea-883f7f39?PageSpeed=noscript

  11. HTCP Department. (2017). Bao cao tong ket nam 2017 [Annual report 2017]

  12. Luong, H. T., Duc Phan, H., Chu, D. V., Nguyen, V. Q., Le, K. T., & Hoang, L. T. (2019). Understanding cybercrimes in Vietnam: From leading-point provisions to legislative system and law enforcement. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 13(2), 290–308. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3700724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. BSA. (2018). Software management: Security imperative, business opportunity. https://gss.bsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/2018_BSA_GSS_Report_en.pdf

  14. Europol & Eurojust. (2019). Common challenges in combating cybercrime. https://www.europol.europa.eu/publications-documents/common-challenges-in-combating-cybercrime

  15. FBI. (2013). Leader in $200 million international stolen data ring charged in New Jersey as part of worldwide takedown. https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/newark/press-releases/2013/leader-in-200-million-international-stolen-data-ring-charged-in-new-jersey-as-part-of-worldwide-takedown

  16. UNODC. (2013). Comprehensive study on cybercrime - Draft. http://www.unodc.org/documents/organized-crime/UNODC_CCPCJ_EG.4_2013/CYBERCRIME_STUDY_210213.pdf

  17. UNODC. (2019b). The role of cybercrime law. https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/cybercrime/module-3/key-issues/the-role-of-cybercrime-law.html

  18. INTERPOL. (2017). Global cybercrime strategy (summary). https://www.interpol.int/en/content/download/5586/file/Summary_CYBER_Strategy_2017_01_ENLR.pdf

  19. Gercke, M. (2012). Understanding cybercrime: Phenomena, challenges and legal response. http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/cyb/cybersecurity/docs/CybercrimelegislationEV6.pdf

  20. UNCTAD. (2020). Data and privacy unprotected in one third of countries, despite progress. coursereg.waseda.jp/portal/simpleportal.php?HID_P14=EN. Accessed 28 Apr 2021

  21. Clough, J. (2014). A world of difference: The Budapest Convention on cybercrime and the challenges of harmonisation cybercrime: A global challenge. Monash University Law Review, 40(3), 698–736. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A422445386/AONE?u=waseda&sid=AONE&xid=f83b8d9d

  22. Maillart, J. (2019). The limits of subjective territorial jurisdiction in the context of cybercrime. ERA Forum, 49, 375–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-018-0527-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Singh, M., & Singh, S. (2007). Cyber crime convention and trans border criminality. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 1(1), 53–66.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yeli, H. (2017). A three-perspective theory of cyber sovereignty. PRism, 7(2), 109–115.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Broadhurst, R., Grabosky, P., Alazab, M., & Chon, S. (2014). Organizations and cyber crime: An analysis of the nature of groups engaged in cyber crime. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 8(1), 1–20. https://www.cybercrimejournal.com/broadhurstetalijcc2014vol8issue1.pdf

  26. Shasha, C. (2021). Cyber security becomes new US weapon against China, Russia. Global Times. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1217885.shtml

  27. Volz, D., & McMillan, R. (2021). Massive hacks linked to Russia, China exploited U.S. Internet security gap. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/massive-hacks-linked-to-russia-china-exploited-u-s-internet-security-gap-11615380912. Accessed 28 Apr 2021

  28. Boni, B. (2001). Creating a global consensus against cybercrime. Network Security, 2001(9), 18–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1353-4858(01)00918-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Peters, A., & Jordan, A. (2020). Countering the cyber enforcement gap: Strengthening global capacity on cybercrime. Journal of National Security Law & Policy, 10(3), 487–524. Retrieved from http://thirdway.imgix.net/JNSLP.pdf

  30. The Council of Europe. (2021). Chart of signatures and ratifications of Treaty 185. https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/185/signatures?p_auth=fDCxuST0. Accessed 16 Jan 2021

  31. Mehrotra, K. (2019). On global cybercrime, India votes in favour of Russia-led resolution. The Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/on-global-cybercrime-india-votes-in-favour-of-russia-led-resolution-6130980/

  32. Stolton, S. (2020). UN backing of controversial cybercrime treaty raises suspicions. EURACTIV. https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/un-backing-of-controversial-cybercrime-treaty-raises-suspicions/

  33. Sherman, J., & Morgus, R. (2018). Breaking down the vote on Russia’s new cybercrime Resolution at the UN. New America. https://www.newamerica.org/cybersecurity-initiative/c2b/c2b-log/breaking-down-vote-russias-new-cybercrime-resolution-un/

  34. Brenner, S., & Koops, B. (2004). Approaches to cybercrime jurisdiction. Journal of High Technology Law, 4(1), 1–46. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=786507%5Cn, http://ssrn.com/abstract=786507.

  35. Jiang, S. (2019). 94 Taiwanese criminal suspects extradited from Spain to Beijing. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/07/asia/taiwan-extradition-beijing-intl/index.html

  36. Eurojust. (2016). Guidelines for deciding ‘which jurisdiction should prosecute?’ https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2016_Jurisdiction-Guidelines_EN.pdf

  37. UNODC. (2019a). Challenges relating to extraterritorial evidence. https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/cybercrime/module-7/key-issues/challenges-relating-to-extraterritorial-evidence.html

  38. United States v. Microsoft (584 U.S. __ (2018)

  39. Global Legal Research Center. (2018). Regulation of cryptocurrency around the world. The Law Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/cryptocurrency/regulation-of-cryptocurrency.pdf

  40. United Nations. (2019). Countering the use of information and communications technologies for criminal purposes. https://www.unodc.org/documents/Cybercrime/SG_report/V1908182_E.pdf

  41. UNODC. (2019c). Who conducts cybercrime investigations? https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/cybercrime/module-5/key-issues/who-conducts-cybercrime-investigations.html

  42. Gawas, V. M. (2017). Doctrinal legal research method a guiding principle in reforming the law and legal system towards the research development. International Journal of Law, 3(5), 128–130.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N. (2012). Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research. Deakin Law Review, 17(1), 83–119. https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2012vol17no1art70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tiller, E. H., & Cross, F. B. (2006). What is legal doctrine? Northwestern University Law Review, 100(1), 517–534.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. HTCP Department. (2011). Bao cao tong ket nam 2011 [Annual report 2011]

  48. HTCP Department. (2012). Bao cao tong ket nam 2012 [Annual report 2012]

  49. Bien, T. Van, & Oanh, N. M. (2020). Tien ao va mot so van de phap ly dat ra o Viet Nam hien nay [Cryptocurrency and legal issues in Vietnam]. State and Law Review, 4(384), 30–40. https://vass.gov.vn/nghien-cuu-khoa-hoc-xa-hoi-va-nhan-van/Tien-ao-va-mot-so-van-de-phap-ly-114#_ftn10

  50. Desnoyers, S. (2013). The challenges of cybercrime for international law enforcement. Utica College.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Vietnam Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2017). Danh muc cac hiep dinh ve tuong tro tu phap va phap ly giua Viet Nam va cac nuoc [List of treaties of mutual legal assistance and legal issues between Vietnam and other countries]. https://lanhsuvietnam.gov.vn/Lists/BaiViet/Bàiviết/DispForm.aspx?List=dc7c7d75–6a32–4215-afeb-47d4bee70eee&ID=414. Accessed 8 Mar 2020

  52. Heusala, A.-L., & Koistinen, J. (2018). ‘Rules of the game’ in cross-border cooperation: Legal-administrative differences in Finnish-Russian crime prevention. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(2), 354–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315625786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Brier, J. (2017). Defining the limits of governmental access to personal data stored in the cloud: An analysis and critique of Microsoft Ireland. Journal of Information Policy, 7, 327. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.7.2017.0327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Schwartz, P. M. (2017). Legal access to the global cloud. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3008392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. INTERPOL. (n.d.). What is INTERPOL? https://www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/What-is-INTERPOL

  56. HTCP Department. (2016). Bao cao tong ket nam 2016 [Annual report 2016]

  57. Department of Cybersecurity and Combating High-tech Crime. (2018). Bao cao tong ket nam 2018 [Annual report 2018]. Hanoi.

  58. Lam, T. (2020). Bao dam an ninh mang trong tinh hinh moi [Ensure cybersecurity in the new situation]. Vietnam Communist Party’s Central Committee. Retrieved from https://www.tapchicongsan.org.vn/web/guest/tin-tieu-diem/-/asset_publisher/s5L7xhQiJeKe/content/bao-dam-an-ninh-mang-trong-tinh-hinh-moi

  59. Dai, Q. T. (2015). Khong gian mang: Tuong lai va hanh dong [Cyberspace: Future and action]. Public Security Publishing House.

  60. Chinh, N. M. (2019). Hoan thien phap luat ve an ninh mang trong tinh hinh hien nay [The improvement of law on cybersecurity in the present]. Vietnam Communist Party’s Central Committee. https://tapchicongsan.org.vn/the-gioi-van-de-su-kien/-/2018/812604/hoan-thien-phap-luat-ve-an-ninh-mang-trong-tinh-hinh-hien-nay.aspx#!

  61. Dong, A. (2020). Truyen thong, an ninh mang va luat phap [Media, cybersecurity and law]. The Communist Party of Vietnam. https://nhandan.com.vn/binh-luan-phe-phan/truyen-thong-an-ninh-mang-va-luat-phap-579963/

  62. Hoa, N. T. N., & Long, B. T. (2020). Nhin lai mot nam thuc hien phap luat ve an ninh mang [One year of implementing the law on cybersecurity]. Political Theory Journal, 4, 93–99. Retrieved from http://lyluanchinhtri.vn/home/index.php/thuc-tien/item/3172-nhin-lai-mot-nam-thuc-hien-phap-luat-ve-an-ninh-mang.html

  63. Cooper, G., & Le, H. (2018). Vietnam’s new Cybersecurity Law: A headache in the making? Duane Morris, pp. 14–16. https://www.duanemorris.com/articles/static/cooper_le_cybersecurity_practitioner_0718.pdf

  64. SaveNET. (2018). Luat an ninh mang: Nhung dieu can biet [Law on cybersecurity: Basic knowledge].

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Prof. Ken Miichi (Waseda University) for his advice and his comments on earlier versions of the article.

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan

    Trong Van Nguyen & Tung Vu Truong

  2. Department of Mathematics, Informatics and Applying Technology Science in Combating Crime, People’s Police Academy, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Trong Van Nguyen & Cuong Kien Lai

Authors
  1. Trong Van Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tung Vu Truong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cuong Kien Lai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Trong Van Nguyen. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Trong Van Nguyen. Tung Vu Truong and Cuong Kien Lai commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Trong Van Nguyen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Table 1

Table 1 Interviewee information
Full size table
Table 2 Comparison of cybercriminal behaviours between Vietnamese criminal law and the Budapest Convention
Full size table
Table 3 Comparison of cybercriminal behaviours between Vietnamese criminal law and the Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Van Nguyen, T., Truong, T.V. & Lai, C.K. Legal challenges to combating cybercrime: An approach from Vietnam. Crime Law Soc Change 77, 231–252 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-021-09986-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-021-09986-7

Search

Navigation