Critics condemn Vietnam’s ‘draconian’ new internet law. vietnam

Social media users in Vietnam on Facebook and other platforms including TikTok will be required to verify their identities as part of strict new internet rules that critics say further weakens freedom of expression in the communist country.

The law, which comes into effect on Christmas Day, will force tech companies operating in Vietnam to store user data, provide it to authorities upon request, and remove content deemed “illegal” by the government within 24 hours.

Decree 147, as it is known, is based on a 2018 cybersecurity law that was sharply criticized by the US, EU and internet freedom advocates who said it mimics China’s repressive internet censorship.

Vietnam’s hardline administration generally moves quickly to suppress dissent and arrest critics, especially those who find an audience on social media.

In October, blogger Duong Van Thai – who had nearly 120,000 followers on YouTube, where he regularly recorded livestreams criticizing the government – ​​was jailed for 12 years on charges of publishing anti-state information.

A few months ago, prominent independent journalist Huy Duc, author of one of Vietnam’s most popular blogs – which took aim at the government on issues including media control and corruption – was arrested.

Authorities said his posts “violated the interests of the state”.

Critics say Decree 147 would also expose dissidents who post anonymously to the risk of arrest.

“Many people work quietly but effectively in advancing the universal values ​​of human rights,” Ho Chi Minh City-based blogger and rights activist Nguyen Hoang Vi told AFP.

He warned that the new decree “could encourage self-censorship, where people avoid expressing dissenting views to protect their safety – ultimately harming the overall development of democratic values ​​in the country”.

Le Quang Tu Do of the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) told state media that Decree 147 would “regulate behavior in cyberspace to maintain social order, national security and national sovereignty”.

In addition to the impact on social media companies, the new laws also include a ban on gaming for those under 18, designed to prevent addiction.

Game publishers are expected to enforce a game session time limit of no more than one hour and 180 minutes per day for all games.

Nguyen Minh Hieu, a 17-year-old high school student in Hanoi who admits he has a gaming addiction, told AFP the new restrictions would be “really hard” to comply with and enforce.

The games, he said, “are designed to be addictive”. “We often spend hours and hours playing match after match.”

Data research firm Newzoo says more than half of Vietnam’s population of 100 million play such games regularly.

A large section of the population is also on social media, with MIC estimating that there are about 65 million Facebook users in the country, 60 million on YouTube and 20 million on TikTok.

Under the new laws, these tech giants – along with all “foreign organizations, enterprises and individuals” – must verify users’ accounts through their phone number or Vietnamese identification number, and that information must include their full name and date of birth. Must be stored with.

They are required to provide it upon demand by the MIC or the powerful Ministry of Public Security.

The decree also states that only verified accounts can livestream, leading to a huge increase in the number of people earning a living through social commerce on sites like TikTok.

Facebook’s parent company Meta, Google, the owner of YouTube and TikTok, did not respond to AFP requests for comment.

Human Rights Watch is calling on the government to rescind the “draconian” new decree.

“Vietnam’s new Decree 147 and its other cybersecurity laws neither protect the public from any real security concerns nor respect fundamental human rights,” said Patricia Gossman, HRW’s Associate Asia Director.

“Since Vietnamese police consider any criticism of the Communist Party of Vietnam a matter of national security, this order will provide them with another tool to suppress dissent.”