These manifestations cannot be considered "minor issues".

After every holiday, the issue of administrative discipline heats up again. In many places, delays in receiving citizens, difficulties in handling administrative procedures, shirking responsibility between departments, and even subtle forms of harassment and extortion still persist. Some matters that should be resolved in a single day drag on for days; some complete and compliant files are left unnecessarily pending; and in some cases, citizens have to make multiple trips due to negligence or a lack of responsibility on the part of an individual performing their duties.

Professor, Dr. Nguyen Dang Dung, a member of the Advisory Council on Democracy and Law of the Central Committee of the Vietnam Fatherland Front, stated: “When citizens have to make multiple trips for a procedure that could be resolved quickly, and when officials lack respect and cause inconvenience, it is no longer a simple ‘administrative error,’ but a manifestation of declining public service ethics. Small instances, if not rectified promptly, will accumulate into social grievances, eroding trust in the public administration.”

Illustration photo: VGP

It's worth noting that these incidents are no longer confined to word-of-mouth. Many cases have been recorded and reported by citizens on social media platforms, creating a wave of public outrage. From an indifferent reception desk, a reluctant official, or a troublesome intermediary, the image of the entire agency, and even the entire government apparatus, is viewed negatively in the eyes of the people.

Some might argue that it's just a "minor issue," a personal mistake, not representative of the entire system. But in the public's perception, they don't interact with an abstract "system," but directly with specific officials and civil servants. A lack of professionalism is enough to erode trust; even a small act of harassment is enough to instill in people a feeling of being disregarded and treated unfairly. When these "small" issues are repeated, persist, and remain unresolved, they accumulate into major grievances, eroding social trust. More worryingly, in the context of rapidly developing digital media, each negative incident can spread very quickly, beyond the local area or unit. Even a short clip recording the unprofessional behavior of an official interacting with the public is enough to create a "public outcry," damaging the image of the government agency. Here, the consequences extend beyond just an individual's reputation; they impact faith in the rule of law and order.

Moral decay in public service - a destructive disease from within.

The underlying nature of the aforementioned manifestations is not merely a violation of administrative procedures and regulations, but a decline in public service ethics. When those performing their duties no longer prioritize the interests of the people and the State over personal gain; when authority is viewed as a "privilege" instead of a responsibility to serve; and when discipline and order are disregarded, corruption begins to emerge. The danger of public service ethical corruption lies in the fact that it often originates from very "everyday" manifestations: laziness, indifference, and apathy towards work; viewing public service as a burden; and considering the processing of procedures for citizens and businesses as a "favor" rather than an obligation. From there, some gradually become accustomed to creating difficulties to "get things done," accustomed to accepting illegitimate benefits to "grease the wheels," and then spiral into a cycle of wrongdoing.

The consequences of this corruption are not only specific inconveniences for citizens and businesses, but also damage to public trust. Social trust does not disappear overnight; it is eroded little by little, with each instance of disrespect shown to citizens, with each unreasonable delay in procedures, and with each disregard for discipline. When trust is eroded, the effectiveness of state management diminishes; even sound policies and initiatives struggle to be implemented effectively.

Notably, these "ethical bottlenecks in public service" are also being exploited by hostile forces to distort the truth, make accusations, and attack the regime. From individual transgressions, they exaggerate them into "the nature of the system," denying efforts to reform the administration, build a rule of law state, and cultivate an honest and professional workforce of officials and civil servants. If we do not confront, clearly address, and strictly deal with manifestations of corruption from within, we will inadvertently create "weaknesses" for false narratives to exploit.

Major General, Associate Professor, Doctor, People's Teacher Nguyen Ba Duong, Head of the 35th Expert Group of the Central Military Commission, stated: "The decline in morality and lifestyle among a segment of cadres and civil servants not only harms administrative management, but more dangerously, it damages the foundation of people's trust. When trust is eroded from very small things, distorted narratives denying the Party's leadership role and the superiority of the regime will have fertile ground to infiltrate and exert influence."

It must be frankly acknowledged: The decline in public service ethics is not an isolated phenomenon, but neither is it so widespread that it is "uncontrollable." The problem lies in where there is still favoritism, avoidance, and indecisive handling; where there is still a mentality of "keeping things private" and fear of confrontation; where "bottlenecks" are likely to persist. And it is precisely this tolerance that fosters corruption.

Strict discipline, maintain order - no tolerance or leniency allowed.

To overcome the "bottlenecks in public service ethics," there is no other way than to tighten discipline and order, assigning specific responsibilities to each individual and each position, especially the responsibility of the head of the organization. Where the head of the organization sets a good example and is decisive in rectifying discipline, the phenomena of corruption and indifference to public service will significantly decrease. Conversely, where the head of the organization is lax in management and afraid of confrontation, discipline is easily disregarded.

Looking at the practical experience of receiving citizens at the grassroots level, Associate Professor, Dr. Nguyen Viet Thong, former Secretary General of the Central Theoretical Council, believes that: To rectify public service ethics, it is not enough to just make general appeals; the responsibility of the head of each agency and unit must be closely linked to discipline and order. Where the head is exemplary and decisive, discipline is maintained; where there is favoritism and avoidance, violations will recur. This observation shows that seemingly minor manifestations directly touch the core of the people's trust in the public administration.

Violations must be handled strictly, openly, and transparently, with no "forbidden zones" and no exceptions. Acts of harassment and inconvenience to citizens cannot be considered "minor violations" and then dealt with superficially or perfunctorily. Each case handled rigorously not only serves as a deterrent to the offending individuals but also sends a strong message about the determination to build an honest and people-serving administration.

It is necessary to continue improving processes, standardizing procedures, and strongly applying information technology and digital transformation in resolving administrative procedures, minimizing unnecessary direct contact – a breeding ground for corruption. The supervisory role of the people and the press should be promoted; channels for receiving feedback, suggestions, and denunciations of negative behavior should be expanded and effectively operated; and those who report the truth should be protected. More importantly, building public service ethics must be considered a core element in building a team of officials and civil servants. Public service ethics cannot remain merely a slogan, but must become a criterion for evaluating officials annually; closely linked to planning, appointment, rewards, and disciplinary actions. An official who is highly skilled professionally but lacks ethical standards cannot be considered a good official. The qualities and attitude of serving the people must be placed on par with professional competence.

Looking directly at the "ethical bottlenecks in public service" is not meant to negate the collective efforts of the officials and civil servants who are diligently serving the people day and night. In reality, the majority of officials and civil servants maintain their integrity, responsibility, and dedication to their work. However, precisely because of this, these "blemishes" need to be dealt with seriously to protect the reputation of the majority and the image of the public administration. Every act of indifference to discipline, every act of harassment against the people, is a scratch on social trust. If these scratches are not promptly rectified, they will accumulate into a larger wound. Maintaining discipline and order in public service today is maintaining the people's trust tomorrow. Not tolerating wrongdoing, not showing leniency towards violations – this is not only a management requirement but also a command stemming from the people's trust in the public administration.

    Source: https://www.qdnd.vn/phong-chong-tu-dien-bien-tu-chuyen-hoa/dao-duc-cong-vu-lech-chuan-he-luy-khong-the-xem-nhe-1029845