English - CEDAW Southeast Asia

CEDAW and the Law:
LIMITATIONS
There were several key limitations.
First, there were challenges relating to accessing legal documents. In many cases,
English translations were not readily available. As a result, to obtain English versions, different
sources of translations were used; for example, the Official Gazette, the MOJ law database,
law firms, and donors, as well as unofficial working translations. There were still a number of
legal documents without English translations. Translations of certain provisions were also
inconsistent across legal documents or inaccurate - even those found in the official publications
- that creates discrepancies with the Vietnamese texts and confusion for those who rely
on English translations. Access to the legal documents was also challenging due the large volume
of legal documents involved. This is due to the law-making practice of supplementing laws
with subordinate laws, rather than laws fully providing all the necessary standards. Hence,
many legal standards are found in subordinate laws rather than in the laws themselves.
Second, another limitation relates to accessing information on impact of particular provisions.
In many cases, no such information is available. Where information is found, it is not
sex-disaggregated or no gender analysis is provided as to existence of disparity or differences.
This affected the use of CEDAW as an analytical tool. In espousing substantive equality,
CEDAW requires an assessment of whether a law or intervention resulted in equality. Without
the required information, such assessment cannot be made.
Third, this review was conducted in an initial time-frame of an estimated 30 working days
over three months, which was later extended to six months due to the volume of the materials
and the extent of time necessary to access them. The time-frame was identified based on the
Directive on Gender Equality Law.
BENEFICIARIES
This review was drafted for those involved in the drafting and reform of legal documents. In
keeping with the objective, this review seeks, in particular, to be useful to the drafters of the
forthcoming government review as per the Directive on Gender Equality Law. Hence, the content
and style of this paper is in many aspects technical and legal. Nevertheless, this review
may also be useful for those monitoring compliance of Viet Nam - and other States - with its
human rights and gender equality obligations.
Hanoi, September 2008
xxiv
Introduction