The emergence of global internet access from the low Earth orbit (LEO) comes with cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Under international space law regimes, the concept of cybersecurity in outer space remains ambiguous. Furthermore, cyberattacks affecting the era’s thoroughly segregated computer space systems were unimagined. Cyber borders are not the same as physical borders. Cyberspace does not admit the demarcation of territorial sovereignty, as it is not based on physical location, and assigning territorial sovereignty to cyberspace is time-consuming. This research proposes the concept of a multi-stakeholder international legal regime for space cybersecurity, as establishing cybersecurity standards and risk management mechanisms necessitates technical measures and a regulatory framework. International cooperation is the only way to provide a fully coordinated approach to cyberspace protection which is consistent with the fundamental premise of international cooperation and collaboration in space.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) means transnational corporations (TNCs) are responsible for not only the interests of their shareholders, but also the interests and welfare of the local community of the area in which they operate. Therefore, TNCs have to furnish the local community beneficial and social services voluntarily and free of charge to help the local community achieve sustainable development. A question may arise whether it is legally feasible to oblige these corporations to abide by social responsibility in oil and gas industry and its resources specially petroleum laws, regulations and contracts as well as international investment treaties. This article shows that basically CSR in oil and gas industry is voluntarily enforced by TNCs who perform it for non-binding and moral reasons. Nonetheless, in oil and gas industry and its sources especially petroleum laws and contracts, it is feasible to require TNCs to undertake CSR and various dimensions therewith.

The WHO reported the Covid-19 outbreak infected 486,761,597 people, involving 6,142,735 deaths worldwide as of 1 April 2022. This contagious disease has spread rapidly throughout the world, including Malaysia. Since the outbreak in Malaysia began in March 2020, the Movement Control Order (MCO) has been implemented nationwide, leaving a significant impact on its citizens, non-citizens, as well as refugees. There is some exploitation of refugees, where enforcement officers are targeting them for criminal offences. Stakeholders claimed the Malaysian government did not provide any assistance to refugees during the pandemic, including health care and economy. This article examines Malaysia’s responsibilities as a host country to refugees during the Covid-19 outbreak. The Malaysian government is proposed to continuously support refugees on humanitarian grounds based on the country’s economic development capabilities. This paper will look into the current situation of the Refugees in Malaysia; discuss the challenges that the Refugees in Malaysia are facing; analyse the legal framework governing the status of refugees; and check the responsibility Malaysia should assume as a host country.

The variation of countries’ industrial policies and political strategies in a multipolar world brings the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) regime to a crossroad. Backlash to the inconsistency, non-transparency, partiality and unfairness of the ISDS regime results from the states’ changing interests and policy priorities, including the rising awareness of democracy. In pursuing the benefits of multilateralism, a multilateral investment court can serve as an alternative to the current investment arbitration regime. States need to clarify the scope of consent based on their political economic considerations. Substantial investment protection standards can be different, whereas the principle of proportionality can serve as an approach to the balance between investment protection and states’ policy arrangements. Meanwhile, there should be efforts to align the interpretation and application of key provisions, possibly through interpretation notes and an appellate body that reviews arbitral decisions, to generalise implicit consensus and to broaden collective acceptance of the regime.

but interpretation and application of the relevant provisions differ, and the views expressed on them still leave ample room to be unilaterally interpreted and applied. So, it is undeniable that conflicts over ocean waters among the concerned countries are serious and difficult to overcome. To solve these problems, the UNCLOS calls for the countries concerned to make every effort to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature. Korea and Japan have maritime boundary problems in the waters surrounding the Korean peninsula, and so, in order to solve those problems, both nations established a joint development zone (JDZ) in the East China Sea in 1974. The zone can be terminated in 2028. Therefore, this study examines and analyzes the impact of the JDZ agreement between Korea and Japan over the East China Sea as to the delimitations of the continental shelf/EEZ

Professor Shen Wei’s new book-Decoding Chinese Bilateral Investment Treaties-has vividly depicted a vibrant China in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and BIT arbitrations. The observations, analyses and findings in his book are supported with abundant empirical evidence and critical theoretical explorations. The ground-breaking contribution made by this book lies in demystifying the patterns inherent in China’s BIT law and practice and adopting versatile methodology to address the literature gap identified by the author. This book not only explores the symbiotic relationship between China’s domestic governance and global BIT networks, but also coherently addresses four inter-connected puzzles relating to Chinese BITs. Professor Shen’s study shows that China and its investors will be proactive rule-makers and active rule-users in the arena of international investment law and investorstate arbitration. This new book will surely be an invaluable inspiration for practitioners, scholars and other persons who have interest in this field.

After President Biden’s first year in office, one big question is whether the Biden trade policy differs from the Trump chaos. My answer is no. I consider Biden’s trade policy to be Trump without the tweets. They both relied on unilateral measures and broadened protectionist ones. In fact, Biden not only relies upon Trump’s actions but also has expanded them. Trade policies have not changed much between Presidents Trump and Biden. In fact, Biden, relying upon Trump’s actions, has kept them in place. There has been a slight change in tune: a little more reconciliation with Europe and the OECD. However, it is extremely difficult to identify any significant difference concerning China, Russia, and Iran. Has Trump’s America First policy morphed into Biden’s America First or worker-centric trade policy? It looks that way. Let’s look at what Trump did, what Biden has done so far, and the challenges ahead.

The interaction between might and right is an important topic throughout the development of international relations. Various ideologies and corresponding practices have been put forward by realism, liberalism, constructivism, and international socialism under both Western international relations theories and China’s traditional Wang Dao (王道, “the kingly way” or “benevolent government”), and Ba Dao (霸道, “the hegemonic way” or “rule by force”). In international relations, the rule of law - a phenomenon that has emerged and is continuously developing - is conducive to restraining power politics and promoting right, which is one of the goals of international relations development. China has always opposed hegemony and power politics; it firmly supports a modern system of international law based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and aims to build a new international political and economic order with peace, justice, and stability.

By the time the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) entered into force, there had been numerous bilateral and multilateral agreements between the parties regarding its rules on dispute settlement. However, the WTO dispute settlement system currently remains the most requested. The present article provides a comparative analysis of the procedures of dispute settlement under the CPTPP, the WTO DSU, and some RTAs. Among the novelties of the CPTPP mechanism compared to the WTO DSU are that it extends its scope to measures not yet introduced, offers more transparency, including the use of electronic means of communication, simplifies access for third parties, and provides financial compensation as a temporary remedy. Although the authors conclude that many of the CPTPP provisions repeat those of the WTO DSU and other RTAs between the CPTPP partners, there may be a desire to test the CPTPP mechanism in practice due to crises of the WTO Appellate Body.

Renewable energy is frequently seen as one of the world’s most promising industries, as it promises a sustainable future in the surge of climate change. Nevertheless, several trade disputes emerge as nations implement policies to boost the domestic green energy industry, putting current trade laws to the test and leaving the detrimental effects on the development of renewable energy technologies. As a result, trade tensions have risen, particularly in bilateral relations between the United States and China. It is impossible to deny that current trade disputes over renewable energy products have practical consequences for governments, institutions, and enterprises. Rising trade protectionism in the energy industry may endanger the fulfillment of specific sustainable development targets. Keeping that in mind, this study aims to examine the recent trade disputes over China’s renewable energy products at the multilateral forum of the WTO, while analyzing protectionism in the context of international trade and practices.

Information on the Covid-19 situation in North Korea and the country’s policy response to the pandemic has been fragmented and incomplete. To better understand North Korea’s Covid- 19-related policies, this article assesses the legal measures that have been implemented by this isolated, totalitarian country to counter the pandemic, including the Emergency Law on the Prevention of Epidemics (ELPE), which was enacted in August 2020. Compared to related laws prior to the outbreak of Covid-19, North Korea’s legal measures implemented in the face of the current pandemic have distinct characteristics. The measures, which appear to supersede other laws, prescribe draconian punishments for violations and expedite criminal sanction. This article concludes that stringent measures have been implemented in North Korea to prevent the spread of Covid-19, to protect Kim Jong-un, and to reinforce the regime’s stability. These measures are likely to be repeated in future epidemics, as they have achieved the status of law.

In China, all dispute resolution mechanisms have introduced online dispute resolution (ODR) system into their operations. To address this situation, this article suggests the principle of due process should include the limitations of Internet-based dispute resolution attempts and the impact of technologies should be taken seriously. The first part of this paper introduces the development of ODR in China. The second part identifies the major areas in which the due process should be secured. The third part focuses on new technologies and its relationship with ODR and among others, electronic evidence and artificial intelligence are discussed. This article concludes that we first need to consider the rapid development of ODR, while the settled procedural principles regarding due process and neutrality should still be the primary task of civil justice and Alternative Dispute Resolution.

Since 2015 China has been actively developing the cross-border e-commerce comprehensive pilot areas. They are one of the mechanisms that the PRC has been promoting international trade in the digital era. Enterprises registered in the cross-border e-commerce comprehensive pilot areas enjoy preferential tax policies and may draw upon the support measures delivered by provinces and municipalities. The State Council also introduced the “Six Systems and Two Platforms” principle which revolutionized the sphere of public administration of crossborder e-commerce trade. This helps to solve many the problems concerning taxation, customs clearance and logistics. Analysis of Chinese legislation and local regulations illustrates that the PRC elaborated a new type of economic zone integrating small and medium sized enterprises into the global trade market. A comparison of Chinese policy with a Russian initiative to introduce new experimental regimes for foreign online trade shows that both states could cooperate by establishing a joint mechanism for cross-border e-commerce promotion. Russia also could use China’s experience in order to launch its own system of cross-border e-commerce support.

Most scholars argue that the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources (PSNR) has been used by developing countries as a legal basis to exploit their natural resources, including forests, for the sake of economic development. Land conversion and forest burning are the primary causes of forest degradation and deforestation in Indonesia. Thus, the biodiversity of Indonesian tropical forests is decreasing tremendously. This article aims to comprehensively analyze the experiences of the Indonesian government to balance the principle of PSNR and sustainable forest management (SFM). The paper argues that the implementation of the PSNR principle in SFM faces many challenges, such as deforestation, forest degradation, and the failures in implementing laws, as well as weak law enforcement. Therefore, to balance the PSNR principle with SFM, the Indonesian government needs to undertake various efforts, such as strengthening law enforcement, carrying out social forest management, and exercising mandatory forest certification. Moreover, all these efforts need to be further improved.

Owing to the lack of consensus in formal negotiations, unilateral statements do not create legal obligations on states. Thus, a unilateral statement is not considered a source of international law under Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. In practice, however, these statements can be legally binding on the states making them and play an important role in the development of international law. The paper aims to examine the characteristics of unilateral declarations and statements in international law and address the Vietnam’s position over the legal effects of the Diplomatic Note 1958 with special references to the South China Sea dispute. This paper will analyze the characteristics and significance of unilateral statements in international law, and argue the conditions for legal binding force. Finally, this paper will provide an in-depth clarification on Vietnamese position on the legal effect of the Diplomatic Note 1958.

Today, the question on the legal instruments of international organisations that impose direct sanctions on individuals and legal entities have surfaced, such as the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions. States are obliged to implement the UNSC Resolutions but would face difficulties in this course. The UNSC’s coercive approach rubs international security against democratic legitimacy, especially when the Resolutions violate due process of law, principle of legality and human rights. To date, Indonesia’s stance on international law (including UNSC Resolutions) under its legal system remains unclear. This study analyses the implementation of the UNSC Resolutions in Indonesia, which has no uniformity without a UN Act. The case of North Korean vessel, MV Wise Honest, highlights the growing confusion in Indonesia because violation of the UNSC Resolutions has not been governed. Conclusively, Indonesia needs to enact a UN Act to provide legal certainty in the implementation of the UNSC Resolutions.

Article 69(7) of the International Criminal Court Statute develops a specific rule to exclude evidence and thus ensure evidentiary reliability and procedural integrity before its proceedings. China has introduced the exclusionary rule of illegally obtained evidence that places an overriding priority on pursuing factual accuracy, because the rule has been devised and applied primarily for the sake of preventing miscarriages of justice and bolstering governmental integrity. A political imperative for truth makes the rule incompatible with the existing institutional environment. The ICC’s rule and practice illuminates the importance of neither assuming the excellence of the rule nor borrowing the rule without modification, but of exploring the rule that is based upon one’s own practical experience, institutional structure, and political powers. This article embraces the room for flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation that can contribute to a healthy scheme for legal transplant and law reform.

The Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) is the oldest active international organization with legal capacity in the progressive unification of Private International Law (PIL). The HCCH aims to progressively unify PIL to address legal problems in the form of universal regulations. Thailand is aware of the significance and importance of co-operation in PIL, as shown by the accession of Thailand to the HCCH in 2021. This article will examine Thailand’s situation with a technique employed by Charles Dickens in his heartwarming story, ‘A Christmas Carol,’ which examined one character’s experience with reference to events in the past, the present, and the future. The past will be examined through the genealogy of PIL and the experience of Thailand before joining the HCCH. The present will address the status of Thailand in the HCCH. The future will be discussed as suggestions for Thailand after becoming a Member of the HCCH.

In a region fraught with tensions and conflicts, the South China Sea Arbitral Award Case (Case) concerned maritime conflicts between the Philippines and China, an inter-State, non-consensual, ex-parte arbitration under Annex VII of the UN Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS). The Case went against China. The Annex VII Tribunal decision of first and last instance, was final and without appeal. However, to the authors, the Case drew attention to the inherently unfair provisions of an exparte hearing under Annex VII that violates the principle of natural justice and casts uncertainty on the role and future of mandatory conciliation under the UNCLOS. These omissions are addressed here. Noting these omissions and limitations, to restore regional goodwill, ameliorate conflicts and tensions, and promote dispute settlement, a solution in mandatory conciliation is proposed -“A Partnership in Comity and Conciliation for the South China Sea”- with its provenance rooted in international law.