Developing an Indigenous ASEAN Economic Community Law and Policy
Edmund W. Sim1

Abstract
ASEAN member states (AMS) have relied on non-ASEAN sources of law to support their interactions. AMS have used WTO and International Court of Justice dispute resolution to resolve issues that could have been resolved using the ASEAN Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism (EDSM).

The resort to non-ASEAN legal sources reflect ambivalence. AMS want to follow procedures, yet lack confidence in applying ASEAN agreements as the underlying legal authorization. This reflects the lack of maturity in ASEAN’s institutions. During the drafting of the ASEAN Charter, Indonesia advocated limiting dispute resolution to ASEAN-level processes only, but Singapore ultimately convinced the members to allow for UN-based dispute resolution as an option.

Using non-ASEAN legal instruments to implement ASEAN-level commitments could undermine the legitimacy of the ASEAN agreements. On other hand, using non-ASEAN legal instruments could give AMS greater confidence by giving them more experience in dealing with each other, albeit in a non-ASEAN context.

The Cambodia-Thailand border dispute over the Preah Vihear temple and its resolution show how this can be accomplished. By invoking the Charter, ASEAN Chair Indonesia injected itself into the dispute. The actions of Indonesia, supported by the Charter, successfully defused the dispute, and showed that ASEAN institutions and agreements can be used effectively. If AMS can apply those lessons to economic integration as well, ASEAN Economic Community administration will be more effective.

Source