As Vietnam accelerates its institutional integration and
competitiveness, the rising intake of applications for the recognition and
enforcement of foreign arbitral awards requires greater predictability and
legal incentive within its national judicial system. However, the prevailing
broad interpretation of the public policy exception in judicial practice
presents a significant risk. It is often invoked as a defence mechanism,
contravening the pro-enforcement purpose of the New York Convention 1958. This
article carries out a normative analysis, integrating comparative law and legal
interpretation based on key jurisprudence from France and Singapore, to
elucidate the dichotomy between the international public policy model and the
judicial minimalism approach. The analysis reveals a critical need for Vietnam
to transition its judicial mindset from a logic of legality review, which
unreasonably involves a review of the case’s merits, to a framework that treats
public policy as an ultimate exception (ultima ratio). This shift is evidently
essential for standardizing the understanding of public policy in its
international sense. Such a reform will not only protect fundamental national
interests but also effectively enhance Vietnam’s capacity to integrate
harmoniously with the global legal order.