Vietnam Identification Procedure Request Form (Mẫu DC02) — Phiếu đề nghị giải quyết thủ tục về căn cước

This file is the source-review record for this document version. It documents the provenance of the published fields and states the current verification claim honestly.

Current claim

• status: draft
• verification.method: manual-source-review-v1
• verification.lastVerifiedAt: 2026-07-14

This is a GovSchema Standard Research cycle (GOV-2986). It opens Vietnam's National ID vertical (6 of 6), following vn/dangkykinhdoanh (Business Formation), vn/xuatnhapcanh (Passport), vn/gdt (Taxes), vn/bca/to-khai-dang-ky-xe (DMV), and vn/bca/to-khai-de-nghi-cap-thi-thuc-viet-nam (Visa).

The pre-scouted candidate (Mẫu CC01) turned out to be a dead end

A prior cycle (GOV-2976) delegated a child issue (GOV-2980) proposing Mẫu CC01, "Tờ khai Căn cước công dân" (Citizen ID Declaration), citing a directly-downloadable specimen at https://dichvucong.bocongan.gov.vn/public_dir/tttl/10/giayto/2020_11/1604372463_Mau_CC01.doc.

Step 1 — re-fetching and re-extracting the pre-scouted source

Independently re-fetched via curl: HTTP 200, application/msword, 57,856 bytes, sha256 cb94e3ea5cbf3eab155f8728a6037cb215b2f9267fd36c34fee50a8403ac466b, Last-Modified: Thu, 24 Apr 2025. A legacy OLE2 .doc, decoded via a UTF-16LE byte-scan.

Extraction-technique correction: this registry's established UTF-16LE scan (accept only ASCII code units with a zero high byte) garbled the Vietnamese text — diacritic characters (e.g. ộ, ư, ế) fall outside that range and every run broke on the first one, yielding fragments like NG HO / I CH / A VI instead of CỘNG HOÀ ... VIỆT NAM. Broadened the scan to a regex over the full utf-16-le decode accepting the Latin Extended-A/B and combining-diacritic ranges Vietnamese actually uses ([A-Za-z0-9À-ỹ\s.,;:()/\-%'"]{6,}), which recovered clean, complete text: 22 numbered items (full name, DOB, gender, old CMND/CCCD number, ethnicity, religion, nationality, marital status, blood type, place of birth registration, hometown, permanent/current residence, occupation, education level, father/mother/spouse/legal-representative/household-head blocks, and an issue/replace/reissue request block with an optional home- delivery address), plus a police-only "KẾT QUẢ XÁC MINH" verification section, footnotes (1)-(5), and the form's own legal citation:

`` Mẫu CCO1 ban hành kèm theo Thông tư số 41/2019/TT-BCA ngày 01/10/2019 ``

Step 2 — the legal-currency check found the citation itself is dead

Following this registry's source-of-truth-fidelity principle, the cited circular's currency was checked rather than assumed. WebSearch + a direct curl of luatvietnam.vn's own article on Thông tư 17/2024/TT-BCA (HTTP 200, 555,346 bytes, sha256 45ad081469154359626335142dba8660f7fca13df2bf81993978118052ac5d2e) quotes Điều 16 verbatim:

> "Các thông tư sau đây hết hiệu lực kể từ ngày Thông tư này có hiệu lực thi > hành: ... b) Thông tư số 66/2015/TT-BCA...; c) Thông tư số 41/2019/TT-BCA..."

Thông tư 17/2024/TT-BCA took effect 01/7/2024 — the same date Luật Căn cước 26/2023/QH15 (Law on Identification) replaced "Căn cước công dân" (Citizen Identification) with "Căn cước" (Identification) nationwide. So the CC01 candidate's own cited legal basis expired nearly two years before this verification date, despite the .doc file itself still being served live with a recent Last-Modified timestamp — a government host serving a stale, superseded document under a still-reachable, still-200-status URL, not a "confirmed dead end" the source itself would have flagged.

This finding was corroborated, not trusted from a single AI-search summary alone — this registry has been burned by exactly that failure mode before (GOV-2486's own memory note, a WebSearch AI summary hallucinating a superseding circular in an earlier VN cycle). Here, the repeal was verified against the repealing circular's own verbatim Điều 16 text, independently re-fetched.

Step 3 — the new circular reuses "CC01" for a structurally different document

Thông tư 17/2024/TT-BCA's own Điều 8 introduces five forms and, critically, reuses the symbol "CC01" for a different document:

> "1. Phiếu thu nhận thông tin căn cước (ký hiệu là CC01) > Phiếu thu nhận thông tin căn cước được cơ quan quản lý căn cước nơi tiếp > nhận hồ sơ ... tạo lập trên cơ sở trích xuất thông tin của công dân ... > trong Cơ sở dữ liệu quốc gia về dân cư, Cơ sở dữ liệu căn cước khi thực > hiện thủ tục."

I.e. the new CC01 is generated by the receiving office itself, by extracting the citizen's already-on-file record from the National Population Database — not a blank template a citizen independently completes. Điều 10 khoản 2 confirms this operationally:

> "Các biểu mẫu CC01, CC02, CC03, CC04, DC03 được tích hợp trong phần mềm > hệ thống ... và in trực tiếp từ máy tính để sử dụng."

CC01 is one of the five forms "in trực tiếp từ máy tính" (printed directly from the case-management computer system) — the opposite of a citizen-fillable application. The pre-scouted CC01 candidate is therefore a genuine dead end for a citizen-facing GovSchema document under the current legal regime: not because the process it represents disappeared, but because the specific artifact (a blank, citizen-completed declaration bearing that name) no longer exists — its successor with the same symbol is an internal system printout.

Step 4 — finding the actual current citizen-facing successor (Mẫu DC02)

Điều 9 khoản 2 of the same circular names the genuine citizen/representative- completed successor:

> "2. Phiếu đề nghị giải quyết thủ tục về căn cước (ký hiệu là DC02) > Phiếu đề nghị giải quyết thủ tục về căn cước được sử dụng khi công dân, > người gốc Việt Nam chưa xác định được quốc tịch thực hiện thủ tục cấp, > cấp đổi, cấp lại thẻ căn cước; xác nhận thông tin số chứng minh nhân dân > 09 số, số định danh cá nhân; hủy, xác lập lại số định danh cá nhân; khai > thác thông tin trong Cơ sở dữ liệu quốc gia về dân cư; khai thác thông > tin trong Cơ sở dữ liệu căn cước; điều chỉnh thông tin trong Cơ sở dữ > liệu quốc gia về dân cư; tích hợp thông tin vào thẻ căn cước; thu thập, > cập nhật thông tin vào Cơ sở dữ liệu căn cước."

Điều 10 khoản 2's system-generated-forms list ("CC01, CC02, CC03, CC04, DC03") deliberately excludes DC01 and DC02 — the two forms not auto-printed from the case-management system, consistent with DC02 being the genuine paper/typed citizen request.

A working specimen was located (WebSearch) and independently re-fetched via curl: https://cdn.thuvienphapluat.vn/uploads/Hoidapphapluat/2024/NTH/22062024/M%E1%BA%ABu%20DC02.docx — HTTP 200, application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document, 38,416 bytes, sha256 435c3001e6c6f1d95ffa3cc8e87e2fc778167378a73b570d25b91f0792c76713, Last-Modified: Fri, 27 Mar 2026. A genuine OOXML .docx (PK\x03\x04 ZIP header), extracted cleanly via Python's zipfile module over word/document.xml plus a tag-stripping regex (no OCR/image step needed — native text-layer Word content). The document's own first line reads:

`` Mẫu DC02 ban hành kèm theo Thông tư số 17/2024/TT-BCA ngày 15/5/2024 ``

— directly citing the currently-in-force circular identified in Step 2, closing the loop.

Field inventory

The extracted text gives a single-page form in three sections plus a signature block:

• Kính gửi (1) — addressee (the receiving identification office).
• I. THÔNG TIN NGƯỜI ĐỀ NGHỊ (Applicant information) — full name, DOB, gender, personal identification number, place of residence.
• II. THÔNG TIN NGƯỜI ĐẠI DIỆN THỰC HIỆN THỦ TỤC (nếu có) (Representative information, if any) — full name, DOB, gender, personal identification number.
• III. NỘI DUNG ĐỀ NGHỊ (3) (Request content — "select one or more") — nine checkboxes: (1) issue/replace/reissue card, (2) confirm personal ID vs. old 9-digit CMND, (3) confirm personal ID vs. a cancelled personal ID, (4) cancel/re-establish personal ID, (5) extract National Population DB info, (6) extract Identification DB info, (7) adjust National Population DB info, (8) integrate info onto an issued card, (9) collect/ update Identification DB info (voice-biometric consent implication per footnote (6)) — plus (10) free-text specific-content elaboration and (11) result-delivery address.
• Signature block: place/date, "NGƯỜI ĐỀ NGHỊ" (Requester).

Scope decisions

1. Modelled the full nine-checkbox breadth, not narrowed to item 1 (card issuance/replacement/reissuance) alone, following this registry's ro/dgpci precedent of modelling a multi-purpose government request slip's complete printed breadth rather than an arbitrary narrowing to the vertical's namesake transaction. Item 1 is the transaction most directly analogous to what closes the National ID vertical; the other eight are secondary procedures the same unified form also serves.
2. No exclusivityGroups on the nine request-type booleans: the form's own footnote (3) reads "Lựa chọn một hoặc nhiều nội dung đề nghị" (select one or more), i.e. not mutually exclusive — unlike ro/dgpci's own single-select checkbox block.
3. Representative block (Section II) modelled required: false across all four sub-fields: the form itself marks it "(nếu có)" (if applicable), consistent with this registry's established convention for optional family/representative blocks (cf. ro/dgep's fathersFirstName/mothersFirstName, both required: false with no conditional gate).
4. Gender modelled as a binary enum (male/female) for both the applicant and representative, consistent with this registry's established convention for Vietnamese government forms (cf. vn/bca/to-khai-de-nghi-cap-thi-thuc-viet-nam's own sex field), even though this specimen prints only a blank line after "Giới tính:" with no visible checkbox glyphs.
5. personalIdNumber fields use pattern: ^\d{12}$, Vietnam's standard 12-digit personal-identification-number format established under Luật Căn cước.
6. Footnote (8)'s five lettered consent-channel sub-methods are not modelled as separate fields — they describe alternative channels by which the data subject's consent can be recorded (in-person signature on this form, the national ID app, a separate written consent document, a legal representative's signature, or left blank when the requester is the data subject), not additional data entered into the form itself.
7. No documents[]: DC02 prints no attachment checklist of its own — Điều 10 khoản 1 covers only its physical paper format (A4, black ink on white paper) — consistent with this registry's ro/dgpci precedent of omitting documents[] rather than sourcing a checklist from an unverified third party when the form itself carries none.

Test run (Phase 4)

No live submission was attempted: DC02 is filed in person (or via an authenticated online public-service channel gated behind national ID app login) at a local Công an office as part of an in-person identification procedure — there is no anonymous online submission channel, and submitting fabricated applicant data against a live government process is not a safe or reversible action.

Instead, two fully hand-constructed mock records were built from this document's own field inventory and validated with a purpose-written, uncommitted script (validate_instance.mjs, mirroring this registry's established approach): compiles schema.json's fields[] into a JSON Schema draft 2020-12 document checked with ajv (via ajv/dist/2020.js for the 2020-12 dialect).

``` $ node validate_instance.mjs registry/vn/bca/phieu-de-nghi-giai-quyet-thu-tuc-ve-can-cuoc-dc02/1.0.0/schema.json \ conformance/vn/bca/phieu-de-nghi-giai-quyet-thu-tuc-ve-can-cuoc-dc02/1.0.0/self-filed-card-reissuance.json Static (required/type/pattern/enum) validation: PASS OVERALL: PASS

$ node validate_instance.mjs registry/vn/bca/phieu-de-nghi-giai-quyet-thu-tuc-ve-can-cuoc-dc02/1.0.0/schema.json \ conformance/vn/bca/phieu-de-nghi-giai-quyet-thu-tuc-ve-can-cuoc-dc02/1.0.0/representative-filed-card-issuance-with-integration.json Static (required/type/pattern/enum) validation: PASS OVERALL: PASS ```

Mutation controls — three negative fixtures, each targeting a distinct validation rule:

``` $ # mutation-control-missing-required-field.json: 'applicantFullName' (required: true) removed Static (required/type/pattern/enum) validation: FAIL - (root) must have required property 'applicantFullName' OVERALL: FAIL

$ # mutation-control-personal-id-pattern-violation.json: 'applicantPersonalIdNumber' set to '12345' (not 12 digits) Static (required/type/pattern/enum) validation: FAIL - /applicantPersonalIdNumber must match pattern "^\d{12}$" OVERALL: FAIL

$ # mutation-control-gender-enum-violation.json: 'applicantGender' set to 'unspecified' Static (required/type/pattern/enum) validation: FAIL - /applicantGender must be equal to one of the allowed values OVERALL: FAIL ```

Disclosed gaps

• No live test submission (see above) — this is a structural-reference maturity document, not an execution-tested-schema.
• Footnote (8)'s consent-channel options and the "Ý KIẾN CỦA CHỦ THỂ THÔNG TIN" opinion block are documented above but not modelled as fields (see scope decision 6).