Monk Thích Minh Tuệ and the Boundaries Between Faith and Control

Thích Minh Tuệ, a Vietnamese Buddhist monk born Lê Anh Tú in 1981 in Hà Tĩnh Province, has become a familiar name to the public. He is known for following the thirteen dhuta practices—an austere monastic discipline that includes walking for alms, eating only one meal a day before noon, and sleeping in secluded places or in the wilderness.

On Dec. 12, 2024, Thích Minh Tuệ and five other monks began a walking pilgrimage from Việt Nam, departing from the Bờ Y border gate to travel toward Buddhist sacred sites in India as part of his spiritual training.

According to Thích Minh Tuệ, what truly matters is not the destination but the spiritual insights gained along the way. This personal quest has drawn widespread public and Buddhist community attention, but it has also posed challenges to public order as large crowds gathered to follow the monks.

The event has consequently sparked questions about freedom of religion, its limits, and the state's role in balancing individual freedom with the need to maintain collective interests and public order.

A Protected but Not Absolute Right

Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right, as recognized under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of the United Nations. The Covenant affirms that every individual has the right to choose, practice, and propagate their religion or belief without discrimination.

Accordingly, Thích Minh Tuệ’s pilgrimage from Việt Nam to India, undertaken as part of his spiritual study and religious cultivation, constitutes a legitimate right acknowledged and protected under international law.

However, freedom of religion is not absolute. Article 18 of the ICCPR stipulates that this right may be restricted by national laws when such limitations are necessary to protect national security, public order, public health or morals, or the rights and freedoms of others.

Therefore, Thích Minh Tuệ’s journey must comply not only with Vietnamese law but also with the laws of the countries through which he travels or intends to visit. This forms the legal basis for the state’s role in managing and supervising religious activities such as this pilgrimage.

The practice of religion or belief, though inherently positive, can at times lead to unintended consequences. For example, when thousands of people flocked to follow Monk Thích Minh Tuệ, traffic congestion ensued and local public order was significantly disrupted.

Therefore, setting reasonable limits on such activities is not meant to restrict religious freedom, but rather to ensure harmony between individual rights and the collective interests of society.

The real challenge lies in how to define this boundary—in a way that neither infringes upon the freedom of belief nor undermines the stability and order essential to public life.

The real challenge lies in how to define this boundary — in a way that neither infringes upon the freedom of belief nor undermines the stability and order essential to public life.

Việt Nam and Thailand: One Issue, Two Approaches

Việt Nam has taken a strictly controlled approach to Monk Thích Minh Tuệ’s pilgrimage. In June 2024, he was required to pause his walking journey to obtain a national ID card—a measure authorities said was necessary to ensure security and prevent large gatherings that could disrupt public order.

Local authorities also closely monitored his movements, at times even requesting that he enter a retreat at an undisclosed location when crowds of followers grew large enough to strain local order. This approach reflects the government’s clear priority: maintaining social stability above all else.

By contrast, Thailand chose a more supportive stance when Monk Minh Tuệ’s group entered its territory in late December 2024. Thai authorities assigned police escorts, checked documentation, and facilitated the group’s journey to ensure it proceeded smoothly.

While they did inspect the YouTubers traveling alongside the group, Thai officials did not obstruct the pilgrimage itself—their actions were aimed instead at ensuring safety and order.

Thailand’s handling of the situation demonstrates a spirit of respect for peaceful religious practice, consistent with the country’s deep-rooted Buddhist traditions and its culture of accommodating faith-based expression.

How Should the State Respond?

The responses of Việt Nam, which prioritized control, and Thailand, which opted for facilitation, show two different rationales for managing the same event. This raises the question of the most appropriate path forward.

While intervention is necessary when public order is disrupted, activities with spiritual or cultural value, like Monk Thích Minh Tuệ’s pilgrimage, call for state protection and support. Việt Nam's government already proves it can do both by successfully managing and securing large public festivals and folk celebrations.

The state can balance these duties by establishing clear regulations for public religious events, such as advance registration and coordination with local authorities. At the same time, the deployment of security forces and logistical support—as seen in Thailand—can be done simultaneously to ensure safety.

Ultimately, Monk Thích Minh Tuệ’s journey is an opportunity to reflect on the relationship between religious freedom and social order. The state’s role is to find a flexible approach that both enables and regulates, ensuring that such spiritual journeys can proceed safely, meaningfully, and with positive impact on the broader community.

Hà Đăng wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on Aug. 3, 2025. The Vietnamese Magazine has the copyright of its English version.