Free Trade Agreements between Japan and ASEAN Member States: A Marriage Made in Heaven?

Author(s):  
Sufian Jusoh ◽  
Intan Murnira Ramli
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-114
Author(s):  
Hieu Le Ho Trung ◽  
Jennifer B. Verances ◽  
Hung Tran Van

Abstract For a long time, corruption has been a shrilling concern for ASEAN member states for the reason of being one of the primary causes restricting the integration of these nations into international trade and efforts at globalization. In fact, over the last few years, ASEAN has undertaken a myriad of policies and improved the regional legal framework to combat corruption such as the signing of UNCAC and new free trade agreements and the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community. Notwithstanding this, according to the statistics of global organizations, the levels of anti-corruption in ASEAN countries, except Singapore and Brunei, are relatively low. This mainly derives from the fact that the national legal framework in each of the member states has not satisfied fully when the political regime lacks democracy, governmental authority is insufficiently impartial and the awareness of citizens about corruption is still moderate. Simultaneously, the international agreements to which ASEAN member states signed are only the model for domestic enforcement mechanisms, and seem to be silent on international enforcement of anti-corruption. To date, the WTO is known as a global agency for international business, to which all ASEAN countries have acceded. Under the WTO, there is no official mechanism for enforcement of anti-corruption; nevertheless, this organization acknowledges, encourages and states indirectly this issue via transparency, accountability or governance in their agreements (Government Procurement Agreement and Trade Facilitation Agreement). Under the Doha negotiation round, WTO member states failed to gain consensus to dismantle tariffs, resulting in the emergence of a myriad of bilateral and regional trade agreements out of the scope of the WTO. These have gradually developed to be so-called new-generation free trade agreements in the hope of mitigating the traditional trade barriers as well as lessening non-tariff ones, such as governance and transparency. The recent development of new-generation FTAs between ASEAN and/or ASEAN member(s) and the external trading partners that pay high attention to anti-corruption issues, i.e., EU, Australia, Canada, Japan, US, may create a promising forum for anti-corruption enforcement of ASEAN in international business in the future. This article will elaborate on all aforementioned issues before a reasonable conclusion is delivered.


Author(s):  
Nikolai V. Fedorov ◽  

: Cooperation with ASEAN is one of key elements of the initiative of the Greater Eurasian Partnership. There are some important preconditions for development of this interaction (the role of ASEAN in the Asia Pacific, the Russia – ASEAN strategic partnership, free trade agreements between the EAEU and ASEAN member-states). At the same time, despite some steps for expansion of cooperation with ASEAN in Eurasian format, now it’s possible to talk only about a preliminary period of involvement of ASEAN into the Greater Eurasian Partnership.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 139-151
Author(s):  
K. I. ZHADAN ◽  

The article examines an international legal framework of the dispute resolution under free trade agree-ments. The existing mechanisms for resolving trade disputes are analyzed and their classification is given. The article demonstrates an evolutionary change of the approach of States to the formulation of provisions on dispute settlement in international trade treaties. Special attention is paid to the systems of dispute resolution under free trade agreements to which the Eurasian Economic Union is a party. The free trade agreements of the Eurasian Economic Union and its member States with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (2015), the Islamic Republic of Iran (2018), the Republic of Singapore (2019) and the Republic of Serbia (2019) are compared with respect to the dispute resolution mechanisms. The article focuses on such institutional aspects as the method of appointing arbitrators, the scope of interstate disputes and the competition of dispute resolution platforms. The effectiveness of the dispute resolution systems of the World Trade Organization and special-ized mechanisms under the free trade agreements of the Eurasian Economic Union and its member States is evaluated. The negative and positive aspects of the existing mechanisms under the free trade agreements of the Eurasian Economic Union and its member States are highlighted, and the ways of their development are proposed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document