Title: The contribution of East and Southeast Asia legal culture on the improvement of DSMs in newly created FTAs in this region

Authors: Yang Songling

Addresses: City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Abstract: The article discusses the issue whether westernised DSMs of newly created FTAs in East and Southeast Asia are suitable to settle disputes just involving countries in this region. Indeed, countries in East and Southeast Asia are adopting an aggressive legalism towards the dispute settlement process. It could be reflected in their increasing complaints in WTO DSB and the design of China-ASEAN, Korean-ASEAN and Japan-ASEAN FTAs. However, the unique East and Southeast Asia legal culture and developing background of this region explore the disadvantages of simply copying WTO mode DSM in the structure of DSMs in FTAs of this region. The rules of main arbitration centres in this region, such as CIETAC, HKITAC, SIAC and KCAB, offer many enlightening suggestions about how to better combine this regional legal culture with advantage westernised dispute settlement process. Such manners are better for the settlement of disputes just involving countries within this region.

Keywords: legal cultures; new FTAs; free-trade areas; trade agreements; dispute settlement mechanism; World Trade Organization; WTO; ASEAN; Association of Southeast Asian Nations; Indonesia; Malaysia; Philippines; Thailand; Brunei; Burma; Myanmar; Cambodia; Laos; Vietnam; DSM; East Asia; Southeast Asia; westernised mechanisms; aggressive legalism; DSB; Dispute Settlement Body; trade disputes; South Korea; Japan; arbitration centres; CIETAC; China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission; JCAA; Japan Commercial Arbitration Association; HKIAC; Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre; KCAB; Korean Commercial Arbitration Board; SIAC; Singapore International Arbitration Centre; KLRCA; Kuala Lumpur Regional Center for Arbitration; regional cultures; public law; public policy.

DOI: 10.1504/IJPLAP.2012.046069

International Journal of Public Law and Policy, 2012 Vol.2 No.2, pp.105 - 128

Received: 08 May 2021
Accepted: 12 May 2021

Published online: 29 Feb 2012 *

Full-text access for editors Access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article