VIII. Conclusion

The Vietnamese government’s efforts to silence Dr. Vu have backfired, and helped to create an unprecedented movement of popular support for him that continues to grow online, as well as in large numbers of people gathering for peaceful vigils to show their solidarity. Indeed, the case gives reason for hope amid Vietnam’s typically bleak human rights environment.

The vigorous defense that his family launched has kept the government off-guard and contributed to public sympathy for Dr. Vu. More remarkable still is the exceptional array of public support that Dr. Vu has attracted from disparate opposition groups that rarely address issues of common concern. Catholic support for him is especially notable in this regard. The Thai Ha Redemptorist church and the Ham Long church in Hanoi and the Bao Long church in Nam Dinh have held vigils to pray for Dr. Vu.[85] Catholic villagers from Con Dau parish in Da Nang have travelled to Hanoi to express their support[86] and many Catholics have signed online petitions demanding his release.[87] The intensity of this engagement is extraordinary given that Dr. Vu is not a Catholic and Catholic churches in Vietnam do not usually expend their limited political resources on issues that do not directly affect their own communities.[88]

Other prominent supporters of Dr. Vu include moderate technocrats and academics affiliated with the Bauxite Vietnam, local groups of land rights activists, and the dedicated political dissidents of pro-democracy group Bloc 8406. Dozens of influential bloggers have covered the case extensively, including Wind Merchant (Nguoi Buon Gio), Mother Mushroom (Me Nam), Nguyen Trong Tao, Kami, Dong A, Nguyen Xuan Dien, Tran Dong Duc, J.B Nguyen Huu Vinh, Le Dien Duc, Vu Dong Ha, Song Chi, Nguyen Hung Quoc, Bui Tin, and many others. The Vietnamese community abroad has followed the case closely through regular reporting including interviews, analysis, and thousands of readers’ comments posted online.

This diversity of support provides further evidence that the case’s unusual dynamics are effectively undermining tactics that the government has successfully employed for years to weaken and divide its opponents. Moreover, the growth of pro-Vu online petitions signed by ordinary citizens unaffiliated with any larger organization suggests the government’s mishandling of the case has tapped into a broader vein of popular dissatisfaction with pervasive corruption in the legal system and security forces’ ham-handed brutality. [89]

The unusual diversity of Cu Huy Ha Vu’s supporters is clearly a function of the wide assortment of legal campaigns that he has championed during the most recent phase of his career. But it also owes something to the rapid spread of information about the case on the internet, spearheaded by a barely visible army of bloggers, citizen-journalists, and Facebook devotees. Indeed, the ground swell of energy created by the case must be understood as an important byproduct of the gradual development in Vietnam in recent years of a nascent legal culture independent of the communist state, and the spontaneous, uncoordinated growth of a dynamic online civil society.