You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

February 8, 2023

Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Decree Takes Important Step Toward Issuance

Subscribe to Updates

Government Approves Legislative Dossier

On February 7, 2023, the Vietnamese government issued Resolution No. 13/NQ-CP (“Resolution 13”) to approve the latest version of the draft Personal Data Protection Decree (“Draft PDPD”)—a draft which has not yet been made public.

Similar to Resolution No. 27/NQ-CP issued in March 2022 approving the previous version of the Draft PDPD (“Resolution 27”), Resolution 13 stipulates the different cases where data subjects’ consent is exempted for processing personal data. Most of these lawful bases are similar to those under Resolution 27—except for the fourth case, which is brand new—with some changes for better clarity.

According to Article 1 of Resolution 13, personal data can be processed without consent in the following five cases:

(1) The processing is to protect the life and health of the data subject or others in an emergency situation. Data Controllers, Data Processors, Parties Controlling and Processing Personal Data, and Third Parties are responsible for proving this case;

Remarks: Vietnamese law, including the prior published version of the Draft PDPD, has never used the terms “data controller”, “data processor,” and “parties controlling and processing personal data.” The inclusion of these terms suggests that the latest version of the Draft PDPD has adopted the GDPR-like concepts of “data controller” and “data processor.” However, until the latest version of the Draft PDPD can be assessed, it is uncertain how these concepts are defined and whether they are fully in line with GDPR definitions.

(2) The disclosure of personal data is in accordance with the law;

(3) The processing of data is performed by competent state agencies in the event of a state of emergency related to national defense, national security, social order and safety, major disaster, or dangerous epidemic; when there is a threat to security and national defense but not to the extent that a state of emergency must be declared; or when the processing is to prevent and combat riots and terrorism, crime, and law violations in accordance with law;

Remarks: This expands the list of situations where the data subject’s consent is exempted compared to a similar criterion in Resolution 27, which simply mentioned “national defense and security requirements.”

(4) The processing is to fulfill the contractual obligations of the data subject with relevant agencies, organizations, and individuals as prescribed by law;

Remarks: Under current legislation, consent is exempted when personal data is used for signing, modifying, or performing a contract to use information, products, and services in the network environment between the data subject and an IT/e-commerce trader/service provider. This basis for consent exemption is stipulated under the Information Technology Law and Decree 52 on E-Commerce.

This new basis under Resolution 13 has been broadened to include the processing of personal data for performing any types of contracts involving the data subject as a party. These contracts may include employment contracts and contracts for purchase of goods/services outside the IT/e-commerce context.

The Draft PDPD seems to have adopted the lawful basis under Article 6.1(b) of GDPR: “processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract.” Interestingly, the basis of processing for “legitimate interests of the controller or third party” under the GDPR does not appear in Resolution 13. As the Vietnamese legislator has always refused to adopt this basis into the Vietnamese data protection regime, it is unlikely to be covered by the Draft PDPD.

The wording of this newly added criterion is rather broad and subjective. It is unclear what could be considered necessary to “fulfill the contractual obligations,” and whether this criterion could be interpreted broadly enough to cover “legitimate interests” of the employer/service provider when implementing contractual obligations with data subjects.

If there is no further guidance on this criterion, we believe that it would be open to the authority’s discretion in interpretation and the arguments of the parties on a case-by-case basis.

(5) The processing is to serve the activities of state agencies prescribed by sector-specific laws.

Remarks: Resolution 27 included the criterion “the processing is for competent state agencies’ investigation and handling of law violations,” which has been removed from Resolution 13. It could be argued, however, that this criterion under Resolution 13 is sufficiently broad to cover the same cases.

Review by the National Assembly

Following the issuance of Resolution 13, on February 8, 2023, the National Assembly’s Committee for Defense and Security held a plenary meeting to review and discuss the newly approved Draft PDPD. According to media reports recapping the discussion, most of the delegates attending the meeting believed that this version of the Draft PDPD had been prepared quite thoroughly, with due consideration of opinions contributed by other state agencies and the public during the consultancy phase. However, given the significance of the PDPD, which covers novel issues that have rarely been tested in practice, the Draft PDPD was still subject to extensive comments from the delegates in the meeting, and possible further review by the Committee for Defense and Security.

What’s Next for the Draft PDPD?

Resolution 13 approves the content of the government’s report on the Draft PDPD, the report on collecting and considering opinions of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, and the content of the latest version of the Draft PDPD; and assigns the Minister of Public Security, on behalf of the government, to report on and consult with the Standing Committee on the Draft PDPD. This means the resolution works as direction and approval of principles for key issues so that the Ministry of Public Security can complete the Draft PDPD for the Standing Committee’s approval before its eventual promulgation.

According to Article 2 of Resolution 13, as the next step, the Minister of Public Security will have to consult the Standing Committee of the National Assembly on the new version of the Draft PDPD. No specific timeline for promulgation has been announced. Following the review session by the Committee for Defense and Security, the Ministry of Public Security will need to consider the opinions of the delegates in the session and update the Draft PDPD accordingly, before submitting it to the Standing Committee.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 9, 2026
Vietnam has taken a decisive step into the global artificial intelligence regulatory landscape with the promulgation of the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law), adopted on December 10, 2025, and effective from March 1, 2026. As one of the earliest comprehensive, standalone AI statutes in Southeast Asia, the AI Law signals Vietnam’s ambition to position itself as both an innovation-friendly and governance-conscious AI market. In doing so, the legislature has also streamlined Vietnam’s AI regulatory architecture. The AI Law repeals most AI-related provisions previously embedded in the Law on Digital Technology Industry No. 71/2025/QH15, consolidating AI governance under a single, unified legal framework. This structural move underscores an intent to provide greater regulatory clarity and coherence for businesses operating across the AI value chain. Against this backdrop, the key question for AI developers, providers, deployers, and governance teams is how the new risk-based framework will shape compliance expectations, operational decisions, and governance design in practice. This article examines the new AI Law through that practical lens, focusing on what it means for AI businesses operating in or into Vietnam. Scope of Application The AI Law applies broadly to Vietnamese organizations and individuals, as well as foreign entities that participate in AI-related activities within Vietnam. The law expressly excludes AI activities conducted solely for national defense, security, and cryptography purposes. A defining feature of the AI Law is that it regulates by role, not by industry. It distinguishes between: Developers, who design, build, train, test, or fine-tune AI models and have direct control over the technical methods, training data, or model parameters; Providers, who place AI systems on the market or put them into use under their own names; Deployers, who use AI systems under their control in professional, commercial, or service-provision activities; Users, who interact with AI
Read More
January 9, 2026
Thailand continues to advance its legal and regulatory framework for the technology sector, with several key laws undergoing review and proposed amendments. These developments reflect Thailand’s broader efforts to ensure that its regulatory landscape keeps pace with rapid technological change and aligns more closely with international standards and best practices. The following are key legal developments and proposed legislative reforms in 2026 that are expected to impact businesses operating in the technology sector and the broader Thai business landscape. Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) Following the full enforcement of Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) in June 2022, businesses and practitioners have identified practical implementation challenges and interpretative issues. These challenges were reflected in an effectiveness assessment conducted by the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) in late 2024. The PDPC published a set of principles for public consultation to identify issues and directions for potential amendments to the PDPA. Key issues: Emerging issues include clarifying the definitions of “data controller,” “data processor,” and “criminal record”; revisiting the scope of sensitive personal data to better reflect Thailand’s context; proposing amendments to the hierarchy of legal bases to avoid misconceptions of consent as the default legal basis; and clarifying the required level of expressiveness for explicit consent, as well as rules for collecting personal data from other sources. Current status: The first round of public consultation has concluded. Next steps: The proposed amendments are proceeding to a revised draft following the consultation outcomes. Cybersecurity Act B.E. 2562 (2019) Thailand is moving forward with proposed amendments to enhance the effectiveness of its national cybersecurity framework, as evolving digital technologies bring new risks such as misinformation, system intrusions, and attacks on critical infrastructure, making cybersecurity a national priority. Key issues: The amendments aim to clarify and strengthen
Read More
January 8, 2026
Thailand’s Digital Government Development Agency (DGA) has proposed new standards that would require government agencies to select cloud services exclusively from a preapproved shortlist of providers. The draft Digital Government Standards re: Cloud Service Provider Standards aims to strengthen procurement confidence and reduce risks associated with selecting cloud service providers that do not meet the required standards. A public hearing period on these standards concluded on December 27, 2025. The DGA will now review submitted comments and consider revising the standards accordingly. Shortlisted Cloud Service Provider Tiers The draft standards establish three tiers of cloud service providers based on their assessed service capability levels, core qualifications, and certifications. The DGA sets qualification requirements for each tier, and it is at the discretion of each agency to select the tier of cloud service provider that best suits its operational needs, as follows: Tier 1 cloud service providers are suitable for providing services involving disclosable official data. Tier 2 cloud service providers are suitable for handling official data and protected data, such as personal data, which requires a high-security public cloud (e.g., virtual private cloud). Tier 3 cloud service providers are suitable for providing services to agencies with specific regulatory and security requirements that handle highly protected data, such as the national security system. These providers must offer sovereign or hybrid cloud as stipulated by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society. All tiers of cloud service providers must be legal entities incorporated under Thai law and can be authorized distributors of offshore cloud service providers. However, each tier will be subject to different requirements, including infrastructure obligations. Government agencies are encouraged to select a cloud service provider appropriate for their intended use. For example, if a government agency intends to procure cloud services for operating applications that process personal data,
Read More
January 8, 2026
Thailand has enacted comprehensive sexual harassment legislation that significantly expands criminal penalties and creates new compliance obligations for online platform operators. The Act Amending the Penal Code (No. 30) B.E. 2568 (2025), enacted on December 29, 2025, and taking effect the following day, introduces a comprehensive definition of sexual harassment, establishes new criminal offenses with graduated penalties, and imposes content removal obligations on social media platforms and computer system service providers. The amendment, which establishes a comprehensive framework for addressing sexual harassment in both physical and digital environments, significantly expands legal exposure for online service operators. It also grants courts authority to order takedowns of violating data accessible to the public. Definition of Sexual Harassment The law introduces “sexual harassment” as a distinct statutory concept covering physical conduct, verbal conduct, sounds, gestures, expressions, postures, communications, surveillance, stalking, and acts committed through computer systems or electronic devices. Conduct qualifies as sexual harassment when it is sexual in nature and likely to cause the victim distress, annoyance, embarrassment, humiliation, fear, or a sense of sexual insecurity. Criminal Offenses and Penalties The amended Penal Code establishes graduated penalties based on the severity and context of the harassment—including enhanced penalties for public or online conduct. For instance: Basic sexual harassment is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, a fine of up to THB 20,000, or both. Continuous or repeated harassment that prevents normal life escalates penalties to imprisonment for up to two years, a fine of up to THB 40,000, or both. Critically for online operators, harassment committed in public places, in the presence of the public, or through computer systems accessible to the general public triggers imprisonment for up to three years, a fine of up to THB 60,000, or both. Acts of harassment committed by supervisors, employers, or others
Read More