ARBITRATION IN CHINA AND ASEAN: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper seeks to explore key issues and challenges impacting trade and business disputes between China and ASEAN countries. Arbitration has become increasingly popular as a dispute resolution mechanism in China and ASEAN, especially with the rise of cross-border transactions and foreign investment. However, there are several challenges and issues associated with arbitration in the region. One major challenge is the lack of uniformity and clarity in the legal framework. There is a diverse legal system in the region, and the inconsistency in the arbitration laws and regulations makes it difficult for parties to agree on the arbitration process. Another challenge is the shortage of qualified arbitrators in the region, which can lead to delays and affect the quality of arbitration awards. The cost of arbitration is also an issue, and the lack of transparency in the cost structure can create disputes between parties, further delaying the arbitration process. The lack of public awareness and education about arbitration is another challenge, which can lead to parties opting for traditional litigation methods. Finally, the lack of transparency in the arbitration process can create mistrust among parties, affecting the credibility of the process. Addressing these challenges will require collaboration between governments, arbitration institutions, and stakeholders in the region to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the arbitration process.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Ali, S., and Phan, T. (2020). “Arbitration in ASEAN: The perception of practitioners.” Journal of International Arbitration, 37(4), 483-500.
Chan, J. (2019). “Arbitration in China: Past, present and future.” Arbitration International, 35(4), 571-588.
Chan, J., and Greenberg, S. (2016). Arbitration in Asia. Juris Publishing.
Chen, J. (2021). “China’s judicialization of arbitration: a critical review.” Frontiers of Law in China, 16(2), 285-300.
Chen, K., & Lin, W. (2018). Cost considerations in arbitration: The China-ASEAN perspective. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 13(1), 121-144.
Duan, J., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Transparency in investor-state arbitration: The China-ASEAN context. In Transparency in International Law (pp. 325-344). Brill Nijhoff.
Ebbesson, J. and Okowa, P. (2017). Environmental Protection and International Investment Law: The Interface. Routledge.
Freeman, C. (2017). The Role of Arbitration in Asia. Springer.
Haas, P.M. (2018). The Globalization of International Society. Oxford University Press.
He, Q., and Zhang, X. (2019). “The jurisdiction of China’s Belt and Road courts over international commercial disputes.” Journal of International Arbitration, 36(6), 765-792.
Ho, B. (2019). The potential for arbitration in the China-ASEAN region. Asia Pacific Journal of Arbitration Law, 11(2), 163-178.
Hoh, P. (2018). “Investor-state dispute settlement in ASEAN: reflections on the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.” Asian Journal of International Law, 8(1), 83-104.
Koh, K. L. (2018). The landscape of international arbitration in Southeast Asia: Past, present and future. Arbitration International, 34(3), 357-375.
Lee, L. (2018). Transparency in Investor-State Arbitration: A Comparative Analysis of the Rules and Practices of Key
Leng, J. (2019). “The ‘Belt and Road’ initiative and international commercial arbitration: opportunities and challenges.” Journal of International Arbitration, 36(4), 405-424.
Li, G. (2023). Arbitration Agreement under Chinese Law. Retrieve from: https://www.taylorwessing.com/en/insights-and-events/insights/2023/01/arbitration-agreement-under-chinese-law
Li, J., and Wu, F. (2020). “Development and challenges of arbitration in China and ASEAN.” Chinese Journal of Comparative Law, 8(2), 199-218.
Poudret, J.F., and Besson, S. (2019). Comparative Law of International Arbitration. Springer.
Qiao, P. (2017). “The China International Commercial Court: A new option for international commercial dispute resolution.” China Economic Journal, 10(3), 326-342.
Roberts, A. (2021). “The ASEAN investment regime and the challenges of legitimacy.” The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 22(1), 107-137.
CIETAC. (2022). Retrieve from: https://hsfnotes.com/arbitration/2023/02/16/cietac-2022-statistics-show-its-endeavour-in-line-with-international-practices/
Tan, J., and Koh, T. (2019). “The RCEP and investor-state dispute settlement: A critical appraisal.” Asian Journal of International Law, 9(1), 29-52.
Tang, H., Ye, W., Wallace, M. and Li, S. (2023). CIETAC 2022 statistics show its endeavour in line with international practices. Retrieve from: https://hsfnotes.com/arbitration/2023/02/16/cietac-2022-statistics-show-its-endeavour-in-line-with-international-practices/
Voon, T. (2019). “Investor-state dispute settlement in Asia: the next wave of international investment agreements.” Asian Journal of International Law, 9(1), 1-28.
Wang, G., and Xia, Y. (2018). “The legal framework of China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A perspective on dispute resolution.” China and WTO Review, 4(1), 69-86.
Wu, Y. (2019). The legal framework for commercial arbitration in the ASEAN region: A comparative analysis. The Chinese Journal of Comparative Law, 7(2), 275-293.