March 21, 2015
– In recent years, numerous scandals have erupted relating to the relationship between businesses and consumers in various fields, such as poisoning breads or bottled soft drinks with foreign objects like files, bugs or shredded rags. The public is deeply concerned about cases in which losses are deemed for the consumer who is defined as the weaker party and should have been protected by relevant authorities.
It is also notable that in most of such scandals, consumers’ reactions often led to adverse consequences for them. A man who found a soft drink bottle containing a housefly was arrested by police being accused of extortion, after he asked the producer to pay for his silence. Another man who believed he was poisoned because he had eaten a loaf of bread of a bakery saw his claim dismissed by the court as he failed to prove he had eaten the loaf.
Legal provisions on the protection of consumers’ interests in Vietnam have made great strides in recent years, highlighted by the promulgation of the Law on Protection of Consumers’ Right in 2010 and guidelines for its enforcement. However, the reality shows that consumers do not thereby get an extra special legal instrument to protect themselves. Whenever, they incur damages, they only have the right to bring a lawsuit and the responsibility to provide evidences under the common law, while having to face the court, the lawyers and a series of procedures that are complicated, costly, exhausting full of bad lucks.
Many people believe that Vietnam’s legal provisions on the protection of consumers have reached the world’s level in terms of coherence and completion, yet consumers are still not well protected mainly due to the weakness of the law enforcement system. Such a system must be made more effective. Especially, it is necessary to improve the expertise capacity and the sense of fairness of the decision makers.
Obviously, businesses which relentlessly pursue profits and ignore the legitimate interests of consumers should be vehemently condemned and given severe financial sanctions. To do so, it is compulsory that a responsive and effective apparatus is established and maintained. Still, to save social costs and promote a civilized lifestyle, it is best to seek ways to minimize those scandals. In other words, it is necessary to make manufactures and service providers to come to term with a vital interest when satisfying customers with their products and services, or at least save consumers from displeasure and damages when using products and services.
Lessons drawn from other countries show that the best way is to create a counterweight to businesses. More precisely, businesses must often face a force with a powerful voice, and be under the strict supervision of such force and subject to sanctions in case they infringe the legitimate rights of consumers. After all, those who are beneficiaries are those feeling the natural urge to care the most about protecting their own interest. Therefore, a counterweight to businesses can be nothing else other than consumer associations.
What businesses fret the most is their customers turning their back on them. Products and services are for sale. If they cannot be sold, businesses will get the cane. Aware of this vulnerability of manufacturers and service providers, legal provisions of other countries endow consumer associations with the right to launch a boycott on the products and services of any enterprises which disrespect the interests of the consumers’ community.
Boycott was also the measure proposed by an official in the transport industry, when he was talking about how to deal with the chaotic situation of passenger transport during Lunar New Year holidays. The boycott right of consumers is also recognized in the local law. However, it is different from other countries as it is only the right of each individual consumer: whoever feels the transporter crams too many passengers into a bus may refuse to use the service. Such boycott is insignificant, thus businesses are not afraid. Furthermore, as they do not have too many choices, passengers may end up switching from one indecent transporter to another that is as bad as the previous, or even worse.
The boycott right of consumers in other countries is a collective right, which is executed under the direction of a consumer association. By sending a message of boycott via its official mouthpiece, the association directs the behavior of its members. The same behavior exhibited simultaneously by consumers can become a powerful punch knocking out the enterprises alleged to have committed misconducts for consumers and refuse to correct their wrongdoings.
(By Nguyen Ngoc Dien – The Saigon Times)