Research on the Construction and Improvement Path of the Investment Dispute Resolution Mechanism between China and ASEAN under the RCEP Framework
- 1 School of International Law, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, China
Abstract
Under the framework of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the investment dispute resolution mechanism between China and ASEAN is confronted with multiple challenges such as insufficient institutional supply, fragmented rules, and operational obstacles. Its underlying causes are deeply rooted in the complex interweaving of the “ASEAN Way” tradition, negotiation interest games, and the differentiated development levels of member states. This paper compares the institutional characteristics and application boundaries of CPTPP’s progressive judicialization, ICSID’s efficiency reform, the EU’s investment court model, and ASEAN’s local experience, and proposes a general approach of “progressive-diversified-balanced”: focusing on coordinating the conflict rules of RCEP with bilateral investment agreements, strengthening the functions of the joint committee; constructing a diversified dispute resolution system centered on an investment mediation center, improving cooperation in industry dispute prevention and adjudication implementation; exploring flexible ISDS clauses and regional appeal review mechanisms. The research breaks through the traditional binary analysis framework of “all or nothing” for ISDS, providing specific path references for the negotiations of the China-ASEAN Free Trade Area 3.0 version and the deep implementation of RCEP.
- Ding, L. B., & Xu, Z. P. (2023). Research on China-ASEAN International Commercial Arbitration Cooperation Mechanism. Journal of Guangxi University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), No. 5 , 167-174. (In Chinese)
- Guo, J. P., & Lei, S. Q. (2025). Research on the Construction of China-ASEAN International Commercial Arbitration Cooperation Mechanism. Social Sciences in Guangxi, No. 5, 50-56. (In Chinese)
- Jiang, D. C., & Wu, J. W. (2024). Exploration on the Construction of Mediation Mechanism for “Belt and Road” Investment Disputes. Intertrade, No. 4, 64-71+96. (In Chinese)
- Ou, J. W., & Tao, L. F. (2022). EU Proposal on the Scope of Appellate Review in Investment Arbitration and China’s Response. Chinese Journal of International Economic Law, No. 3, 116-125. (In Chinese)
- Qi, T. (2023). An Important Milestone in the Modernization Reform of Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism—Comments on the 2022 ICSID New Rules. International Economic Review, No. 3, 51-67+6. (In Chinese)
- Sang, Y. K. (2022). On the Optimization Path of China’s Investment Dispute Prevention Mechanism. Intertrade, No. 3, 66-73. (In Chinese)
- Wang, Q., & Gao, J. H. (2018). Research on the Construction of RCEP Dispute Settlement Mechanism. Global Review, 10, 134-152. (In Chinese)
- Wang, Y. Z. (2021). RCEP Investment Chapter: Asian Characteristics and Global Implications. Contemporary Law Review, 35, 44-58. (In Chinese)
- Zhang, J., & Hang, M. (2018). International Investment Arbitration Rules: Concept, Structure and Innovation—Centered on the Comparison between SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules and CIETAC Investment Arbitration Rules. Arbitration and Law, No. 1, 1-17. (In Chinese)
- Zhang, X. J., & Cao, Y. S. (2021). Risks and Responses under RCEP Regional Investment Opportunities. International Business Research, 42, 11-21. (In Chinese)