A/HRC/28/57/Add.1 land rights and development projects or from criticizing policies, strategies and activities of the Government or the Communist Party and the bauxite exploitation in the Central Highlands. Furthermore, artists who make reference to violence, sex, drugs or general social problems are often considered to be promoting them and/or giving the country a bad image, jeopardizing positive social values, undermining the spirit of the people and the harmony between groups and negatively affecting youth. Literary works set in contemporary times around contemporary issues and actors are at greater risk of being prohibited, but expressions considered as conveying “distortions of historical truth”, or as being too critical of historical figures, such as Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Marx, are also censored. 46. The practice of not clearly indicating the reasons for censoring artworks and the lack of transparency in the parameters used is a constant issue of concern for artists. On the positive side, an ongoing discussion on those issues between artists and the authorities is evident, which some believe indicates some openness on the part of the Government, and recognition, albeit slow, that artists may engage in social and political issues. The Special Rapporteur stresses that the discussion is an important process for moving forward and recalls that, beyond providing aesthetic pleasure, artists contribute to social debates, including through counter-discourses, that are a vital part of democratic societies. Moreover, definitions of truth, humanity or beauty are always subject to discussion, and artists, that is, all people who express themselves through the arts, whether professionals or amateurs, have an important role to play in voicing their views. 47. The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned at testimonies and reports indicating that a number of artists have been under surveillance, harassed or detained. Artists have been convicted under article 88 of the Criminal Code for “conducting propaganda against the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam”,9 which is not a legitimate ground for restriction of artistic freedom under international standards. In 2012, intellectuals in Viet Nam asked for the removal of article 88 from the Criminal Code as being too vague. 48. Of particular concern to the Special Rapporteur is the general government policy of directing and controling the content of academic research. For example, Decision 97, issued by the Prime Minister, which came into effect in September 2009, limits scientific and technical research to 317 approved topics. That seriously curtails the freedom that is indispensable for scientific research and creative activity, as set out in article 15, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Vietnam Institute of Development Studies, an independent think tank, decided to close down rather than be subjected to such restrictive rules and additional impediments. (b) Prior and post censorship 49. Viet Nam has established a system of prior and post censorship for a wide range of artistic expressions. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the steps taken to reduce the scope of prior censorship, but is concerned that legislative advances have not materialized in practice and that censorship is still widely practised through various mechanisms. 50. In the area of cinema, for example, given the enormous human and financial investments required to produce a film, directors, producers and investors prefer to submit scripts in advance to the Cinema Board of Censorship rather than run the risk of facing a possible restriction after completing the movie. That situation is reinforced by the fact that motivations for possible prohibition, as explained above, are very wide and have a chilling effect on cinema productions. 9 See A/HRC/23/51, p. 32, case No. VNM 5/2012. 11