Prosedur dan Efektifitas Mekanisme Penyelesaian Sengketa Perdagangan dan Investasi Dalam ASEAN

Trade and investment play an important role in the practice of relations between countries in the prospective economic cooperation efforts to increase the economic growth of each country. In this regard, ASEAN also has legal instruments that regulate transactions and investments among other countries. In the trade regime, ASEAN has several agreements such as the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement, ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement, ASEAN Trade in Services Agreement, ASEAN Framework Agreement on Services, and so on. Meanwhile in the investment regime, ASEAN has the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement. One of the important components in a Regional Trade Agreement is the clause of a legally binding dispute settlement mechanism. In the trade regime, the system and mechanism of the dispute resolution procedures are separated from other trade agreements, the ASEAN Protocol on the Enhanced Dispute Resolution Mechanism. Meanwhile in the Investment regime, the system and mechanism of the dispute resolution procedure are regulated in the same agreement in the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement. This article will describe the procedural mechanism for the dispute resolution framework of the trade and investment regime in ASEAN, as well as focus on each dispute resolution system with the preferences of each participating country, with differences in the use of the dispute system in the WTO.

Designing mediation for Scottish Civil Courts: Options and opportunity

In this article, the author examines whether the dispute resolution processes proposed in 2019 for civil courts in Scotland are suitable for the context of civil justice in Scotland in 2020 and the future. They are measured according to the policy context, what is known about the purposes of litigation, dispute system design and the needs and cultures of an adversarial civil justice system currently grappling with the impact of coronavirus restrictions.

Why the Haves Come Out Further and Further Ahead: The Repeat Player Effect, Control over Dispute System Design, and Justice

Let’s start at the beginning of the yellow brick road that led to the Repeat Player Effect paper. I skipped my senior year of high school to attend a women’s college (Smith) and double-majored in ancient Greek and philosophy, on account of which (cf. Sleepless in Seattle...

A Comparative View of "A Third Labour Dispute Management System" of China with Ethiopia: Some Cases as Evidence and Recent Labour Issues of both Jurisdictions

The history and political economy transition of China and Ethiopia are quite similar in many aspects. Long history, socialist transition, and legal reform can be mentioned as points of comparison. Among the legal reforms of the two countries, the labor law reform and the determination of working forces (labour forces) was quite critical in both countries that stayed in socialist sentiments though the Chinese model is still "socialism with Chinese characteristics." The opening up and reform of the two countries, the 1978 reform and opening of China and the 1991 market economy declaration of Ethiopia paved the way to shape the labour law legal regime of the two countries. Especially, the labour dispute management system of the two countries shares unique commonalities. The involvement of arbitration in labour dispute system in each jurisdiction has its own unique features. Thus, the paper tried to compare the labour law legal regime, the labour law dispute management system, and the current labour issues of China and Ethiopia. The findings indicate that there are many similarities that the two countries share and can benefit from mutual experience sharing. But, in cases of China, the issues of collective bargaining and labour union-related rights are at their early stage of development. And the treatment of migrant workers and the law, as well as the practice of triangular relationship among the worker, the forwarding unit and receiving unit is very crucial that experience can be taken from it.

Disputant Experience and Preferences for Mediated or Adjudicated Processes in Administrative Agencies: The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Settlement Part Program

Research is limited regarding the type and amount of experience that matters for disputant preferences in dispute resolution processes. The authors focus on a unique federal appellate agency dispute resolution program at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. Participants are professionals with repeat experience who are likely to have future interactions with the agency. Using survey data and regression analyses, the authors find that 1) greater personal experience with mediation or adjudication leads to a greater preference for mediation over adjudication; 2) higher levels of satisfaction with the fairness of process are associated with stronger preferences for mediation over adjudication; and 3) disputants who perceive a fair process in their most recent cases will express a greater preference for mediation over adjudication. Results have important implications for dispute system design.