Public service centre in Trần Phú Commune, Hải Phòng. The draft amended Law on Land released on July 20 removes the requirement that contracts and documents relating to land use rights transactions must be notarised or certified. — VNA/VNS Photo Mạnh Minh

HÀ NỘI — The proposal to remove mandatory notarisation for land transactions under a draft amendment to the Law on Land has triggered debate over whether cutting procedures and costs could come at the expense of legal protection for property buyers.

Released on July 20, the draft removes the requirement that contracts and documents relating to land use rights transfers, leases, inheritances, gifts, mortgages and capital contributions must be notarised or certified.

Instead, the draft stipulates that land users must have valid land certificates, ensure their land is free from unresolved disputes, not subject to enforcement measures, within the permitted use period and not affected by emergency legal restrictions.

Under current regulations, notarisation and certification are considered important conditions to ensure the legality of land-related transactions under Article 27 of the Law on Land 2024.

The proposed reform is expected to reduce unnecessary procedures, save time and costs as Việt Nam’s digital databases on citizens, land and electronic identification are increasingly developed.

However, legal experts said that notarisation currently serves as a critical safeguard against fraud and disputes, and its removal would require an effective replacement mechanism.

Lawyer Trần Minh Cường from the HCM City Bar Association said the proposal, if approved, would represent one of the most significant changes to the real estate transaction framework.

The key issue was not whether people could save notarisation fees or reduce paperwork, but whether there would be a mechanism capable of replacing the risk-control role currently performed by notaries.

Notarisation is essentially a mechanism to prevent disputes, he said. Before a transaction is completed, notaries verify civil capacity, the voluntary consent of parties, representation rights, ownership status and the legality of documents.

Cases involving fake identities, forged documents, unauthorised transfers of jointly owned assets, transactions conducted by people lacking legal capacity or agreements signed under fraud could become more difficult to detect at an early stage, he pointed out.

Lawyer Nguyễn Văn Quynh from Hưng Yên Law Firm under the Hà Nội Bar Association questioned who would take responsibility for legal verification if mandatory notarisation was removed.

Quynh warned that two scenarios could emerge.

The first would be transferring responsibility to land registration offices, which would cause more pressure on them to assess the validity of civil contracts.

The second would be moving towards a post-check model, but this could create risks if land databases, ownership insurance mechanisms and supporting infrastructure were not sufficiently developed.

“Removing an administrative procedure without a replacement mechanism would transfer risks to citizens and could put additional pressure on the court system,” Quynh said.

He warned that removing notarisation could lead to a rise in sophisticated fraud, including fake ownership documents, impersonation of property owners and manipulation of marital or inheritance information.

Administrative reform was necessary but should not come at the expense of legal safeguards, he said, adding that the removal of mandatory notarisation would only be effective if accompanied by a comprehensive replacement framework, he said.

Lawyer Trương Văn Tuấn, head of Trạng Sài Gòn Law Office, said mandatory notarisation should not be completely removed for land-use rights transactions.

Notarisation was not simply a signature certification process but also a legal review mechanism that helped detect incomplete documents, disputed land or restricted transactions.

“Notarisation costs are very small compared with the value of real estate, while dispute resolution costs can be many times higher and last months or even years,” Tuấn said.

Lawyer Nguyễn Hồng Thảo from the HCM City Bar Association said to remove notarisation, it is critical to establish stronger replacement mechanisms, including a unified national land database, interconnected population and civil status data, reliable electronic identification and digital signatures, as well as automated risk-warning systems.

However, she said current databases were still not sufficiently integrated, with incomplete digitisation, outdated information and limited connections between agencies. — VNS