QUOTE(Avangelice @ May 29 2025, 10:15 AM)
So this is a we problem or just a Vietnam bureaucracy issue?
Malaysia government should sign the 1968 IDP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Driving_PermitIf you check wikipedia, the are 3 types of IDP: 1929, 1949, 1968. You may ignore 1929 as only a few countries signed it.
Countries with 1949 only: Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Cambodia, Japan, USA, Australia, Canada, India, etc
Countries with 1968 only: Vietnam, Indonesia, Myanmar, Brazil, Pakistan, Costa Rica, etc
Countries with both: Thailand, Philippines, China, UK, Switzerland, Italy, Germany, etc
By right, ASEAN license can be used in anywhere within the ASEAN countries. But in reality, local enforcement is different and some countries (eg: Vietnam) don't recognise it.
IDP is just a temporary permit for tourists or short term foreigners to drive in the country. I feel that if tourism is a big contribution to the country GDP, the countries should have both 1949 and 1968 IDP. Why? It will provide convenience to tourists and temporary stay foreigners to drive locally and spend money. It will help the economy.
For example: Thailand and Philippines have both the IDP. They provides lots of convenience to foreigners/tourists. So, it helps in term of tourism.
If Malaysia government wants to attract tourists from Countries with 1968 IDP only, Malaysia should sign 1968.
If Vietnam government wants to attract tourists from Countries with 1949 IDP only, Vietnam should sign 1949.
But the problem is based on ChatGPT:-
The last country to accede to the 1949 Geneva Convention on Road Traffic was Zimbabwe, on 18 February 1991.
After the 1990s, almost all new accessions have been to the 1968 Vienna Convention, not the 1949 Geneva Convention.
The 1949 Convention is now considered “closed” in practice, with no new major signatories in recent decades.
Conclusion: Malaysia government should sign the 1968 IDP to provide convenience to tourists (1968 only) coming to Malaysia and for Malaysians going overseas