Receiving bribery is classified in Article 277 of the Criminal Code as a crime related to a person who is assigned to “perform a public task” (thực hiện công vụ) and has certain authority in performing such a “public task”. There is no definition of public tasks. But according to the Law on State Compensation, a person “conducting public tasks” (thi hành công vụ) is a person who is elected, approved, appointed, employed or appointed to hold a position in a State agency (cơ quan nhà nước) to conduct the tasks of administrative management, litigation, enforcement of judgement or other person who are authorised by a State agency to conduct tasks relating to administrative management, litigation, enforcement of judgement.

The above provisions suggest that only State officials or those relating to the State could be subject to the crime of receiving bribery. And employees or staffs of private companies should not be subject to such crime.

However, according to news provided by the press, the court and the police recently handle “private bribery” cases in which bribe receivers are officers of private companies. One of the cases is an appellate decision of the Appellate Court in Ho Chi Minh City under the Supreme People’s Court deciding two officers of Techcombank, a private commercial bank, were guilty of bribe receiving crime under Article 279 of the Criminal Code. In another case, an engineer who worked for a local real estate developer was arrested by the police for accusation of the bribe receiving crime. If the reported news are correct then the implementation of anti-bribery regulations by the court and the police seems to be inconsistent with provisions of the Criminal Code that bribe receivers must be persons having “public tasks” or “positions, powers”.