Investment Arbitration Law: Challenges For Investor–State Arbitration In The ASEAN Community

Abstract

The ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA) gives aggrieved investors the option to refer their disputes to arbitration in resolving their disputes. Many foreign arbitrage decisions is found t be time consuming when it comes to enforcing the decision and cases over the final and legal binding arbitrage decision being overturned by court’s decision in Indonesia. ASEAN Countries have to face contractual with the foreign Investors through international investment arbitrations whether the outcome favorable or not those countries have spent significant time, energy, and financial resources from ASEAN countries. The ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA), that provides the legal basis for the AEC’s liberalized investment regime, establishes an investor-state dispute resolution mechanism (ISDR mechanism). This may influence of the provisions specifically designed to protect foreign investors such as national treatment, fair and equitable treatment: most favored nation; and also in deciding jurisdictional Issues. Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) as a legal basis for foreign investment activities aim to provide protection for foreign investor. BITs often contain excessive and limitless protection clauses in order to attract foreign investors. it is necessary to strengthen cooperation among ASEAN members in dealing with foreign investors through BIT The ideal picture will be that SEA is pro-market and pro-arbitration reform. Arbitration proceeding, the arbitrators and counsels more often from and not only do they lead to high cost, but also they lack of familiarity with South East Asia's social, politics, economic culture and customs.