At a meeting last week, Prime Minister Le Minh Hung required ministries and agencies to prioritize resources for the formulation and perfection of institutions and policies; simultaneously, when submitting draft laws, they must include draft guiding documents for implementation, such as decrees and circulars.

This is a command that strikes directly at a persistent bottleneck: the gap between law enactment and implementation guidance.

A familiar void

In economic life, this gap is not abstract. It manifests in delayed decisions, halted projects, and even the departure of many businesses, simply due to the lack of a guiding document.

It is not uncommon for businesses to be ready to implement projects or expand operations, only to find themselves bewildered because they do not know which process to apply, which regulations to follow, or who holds the authority.

When clear guidance is absent, they are forced to delay investment decisions because they dare not accept legal risks; meanwhile, enforcement agencies in different localities may understand and apply laws in various ways, leading to inconsistent practices.

The familiar answer in such situations is often: waiting for a decree, waiting for a circular. And that "waiting" can last for months, even years.

The latest oversight figures from the National Assembly’s committees show that this is not a subjective perception. According to Dai Bieu Nhan Dan Newspaper, up to 173 documents providing detailed regulations were delayed in issuance, many of which were late by 6 months to 2 years; concurrently, 47 articles and clauses across 21 laws and resolutions still lack guiding documents.

A very specific state of affairs thus emerges: the law exists, but it cannot yet be applied in reality.

Laws without full execution

The Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Documents has long required that implementing documents be prepared alongside draft laws to ensure their immediate enforceability upon entry into force.

In other words, lawmakers have already mandated that the “rails” for implementation be laid at the same time as the law. In practice, however, the two processes are often separated. Laws are passed without accompanying decrees or circulars, which are drafted later, often from the perspective of regulators.

This creates a familiar cycle: laws wait for decrees, decrees wait for circulars, and the economy waits for all of them to be brought into life.

The pressure comes not only from delays but also from changes in lawmaking. As laws become shorter and delegate more detailed guidance to sub-law documents, the system grows increasingly dependent on decrees and circulars.

When these links lag behind, the entire system ends up chasing the very laws it has just enacted.

This pressure is evident in recent legislative programs. In 2025, the National Assembly passed 89 laws, but only 25 took effect within the same year, with most deferred to 2026.

A necessary adjustment

In this context, the Prime Minister’s requirement to submit draft decrees and circulars alongside draft laws, if strictly enforced, would force a fundamental shift in how legislation is developed.

Drafting bodies would need to go beyond setting general principles and clearly envision how laws will function in practice, from procedures and standards to the responsibilities of implementing agencies.

In other words, instead of “passing the law first and figuring out the rest later,” the system must adopt a mindset of designing complete policies from the outset.

This shift aligns with broader reforms outlined in Resolution 66-NQ/TW, which emphasizes building a legal system that is coherent, feasible, and applicable in real life.

Such a system cannot rely solely on well-written laws in principle. It requires that implementation conditions be fully and promptly prepared.

Submitting implementing documents together with draft laws is therefore not just a technical fix, but a way to turn the principle of “enforceable laws” into concrete action.

Of course, the accompanying challenges cannot be underestimated. Preparing laws and guiding documents simultaneously requires higher drafting capacity, closer coordination between ministries and sectors, and, most importantly, more clearly defined accountability.

Without good control, there is a risk of rushing to meet deadlines, leading to overlapping or inconsistent documents.

However, if fear of those risks leads to the continuation of old methods, the cost the economy must bear will be far greater.

An economy aiming for high and sustainable growth cannot operate with unfinished or unenforceable laws.

Tu Giang