[Vnbiz] Intel Vietnam refuses to pay bribes

[Tran Dinh Hoanh]

Dear brother Phong & CACC,

Let's try to clarify this issue by being practical.

I agree to follow brother Phong's logics:  Our people are so corrupt, we
need ruole of law.  But for the rule of law to operate well, we need
non-corrupt people to operate the law.  So we are in the chicken-and-egg
circle.  Where do you, brother Phong, find non-corrupt people?

My solution is:  We find non-corrupt people thourgh promoting ethics, such
as the Intel Vietnam's memorandum, we need to teach ethics in universities
(for all kinds of professional students, including business students), we
need to promote ethic teaching in families (where parents train children to
be honest and socially responsible) or in churches and temples or mass
organizations like Thanh Doan or Hoi Phu Nu.  We need to bring ethics to the
forefront to produce good people, and good people will start good rule of
law.

Where do you  find non-corrupt people to start your rule of law, brother
Phong, or anyone?  I love to hear an answer.

Have a great day!

Hoanh


On 8/15/07, Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov <Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov> wrote:
>
> [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
>
>
>
>
> Having a legal system in place is not the same as having the rule of law.
> The rule of law, in short, is my quick answer to chi Lien's question.
> The "ultimate victory of goodness" is a lofty goal on the order of the
> "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs", they
> are great goals to aspire to but are unlikely to happen on a global scale at
> this stage of human evolution.  If any force is poweful enough to try to
> impose either, we end up with a theocracy or communism, each with their
> attendant problems.
> In corrupt countries that have laws, there are those in the ruling class
> that consider themselves above the law, hence the is no rule of laws.
> You wouldn't have had to argue with your friends if the rule of law was in
> place and none one is operating outside or above it.
> Singaporean have a good sense of ethics.  The question is where does that
> sense of ethics came from.  My contention is the rule of law (that was and
> is considered so draconian as to infringe on individual freedom/civil
> liberty).  How do you explain the decidedly unethical behavior of some
> Singaporeans when removed from Singaporean legal proper?  A sudden heart
> replacement operation?  How do you explain ethical American companies
> belly-aching  about how the FCPA limits them from being corrupted?
> There is nothing wrong with being ethical.
> The issue I have is when you discuss building ethics moralistic terms,
> even confusing it with professional codes of ethics are being more than the
> set of rules that they are.  I don't see that anyone in this forum is
> resisting building ethics or contending that it is not important or
> necessary.  I would be interested in seeing how you came to that conclusion.
>  On the other hand, you had earlier confused the rule of law with just a
> bunch of laws.
> I am glad we agreed that being ethical in business is practical.
>  Logically, that means that we may not be/cannot afford to be ethical  in
> business anymore when it is no longer practical.  In environments that do
> not support being ethical, corruption is easily understood in this context.
>  The solution is to fix the environment, ie, institute the rule of law
> first.  Training the heart will then be much more practical and doable
> because it doesn't conflict with the reality of survival, and can be
> accomplished through general education.  Conversely, no amount of heart
> training can overcome the forces of corruption when there is no rule of law
> or respect for it.
>
> --
> Tran Dinh Hoanh, Esq., LLB, JD
> Washington DC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz/attachments/20070815/9335084c/attachment.html