Protecting the Identity of Juveniles in Criminal Proceedings in Viet Nam and Victoria: Open Trials and Restricted Publication

Abstract This article compares protections relating to the non-disclosure of the identity of juveniles involved in the criminal justice systems of Viet Nam and Victoria (Australia). Both jurisdictions are committed to the principle of having an open court for the trials of juveniles. Nevertheless, being mindful of recommendations made by human rights bodies such as the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child – which promotes a closed court for these cases – both jurisdictions also recognise the importance of protecting the identity of juveniles on trial for criminal offences. They seek to balance their competing commitments to open court hearings and the protection of privacy through severely restricting the publication of information that could identify juvenile defendants. However, a review of the law and practices in both jurisdictions identifies different impacts and a number of problems. While restrictions on the publication of identifying information works effectively in Victoria, relevant laws are regularly breached without prosecution in Viet Nam. Significantly, existing protections in both Viet Nam and Victoria are almost exclusively focused on the trial phase and very few effective protections exist at earlier points, such as arrest and interrogation. This was highlighted by a focused investigation of pre-trial detention (bail), which revealed that while the practical operation of bail processes in Victoria is relatively stronger than in Viet Nam, statutory reform is required in both jurisdictions to strengthen legal protections against disclosure. In summary, the analysis demonstrates that it is possible to effectively protect the identity of juvenile defendants at the trial phase in an open court system provided that laws prohibiting the publication of identifying information are enacted, observed and enforced. In Viet Nam, significant changes in attitudes and practices are required to achieve this. Moreover, reform is required in both jurisdictions if the identity of juveniles involved in criminal justice proceedings is to be protected at the pre-trial phase.