ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVES ON CORRUPTION
AND FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT IN THE
ASIA-PACIFIC REGION
Monday | 29 May 2023 | 8:00 am - 5:00 pm
ILIA Conference Room | ILIA | Universiti Brunei Darussalam

ABOUT THE SYMPOSIUM
Corruption is condemned in any society. However, scholars and practitioners have not reached aconsensus on the consequences of corruption in foreign direct investment (FDI). Thus, Asian countries
have adopted different approaches to FDI-related corruption. Brunei has been fighting against corruption
successfully, as evidenced by its high ranking in the Corruption Perceptions Index. In 2020, the Sultanate
ranked second in ASEAN after Singapore. The result is impressive, and Brunei’s rigorous attitude towards
corruption suggests further improvement is plausible. This symposium’s invited speakers will analyse anddiscuss the mechanism of FDI-related corruption from legal and economic perspectives, using casestudies from countries in Asia. Through the sharing of experiences and best practices, the symposium
contributes towards a deeper understanding of corruption in FDI and its mitigation.

PLENARY SESSIONSSESSION 1

SESSION 2

SESSION 3

Business andEconomic Issues

Legal Issues Related
to Corruption andCountry Reports on
Corruption and FDI in the

Relating to Corruption

ISDS in Asia

Asia-Pacific Region

Contact Mr Frankie Ong at frankie.ong@ubd.edu.bn
to RSVP and for more information

BY INVITATION ONLYNO REGISTRATION FEE

“Academic Perspectives on Corruption and Foreign Direct Investment in the Asia-Pacific Region”
Date: 29 May 2023
Venue: ILIA Conference Room at UBDCorruption is condemned in any society. However, scholars and practitioners have not reached a consensus on theconsequences of corruption in foreign direct investment (FDI). Thus, Asian countries have adopted different approaches to
FDI-related corruption. Brunei has been fighting against corruption successfully, as evidenced by its high ranking in the
Corruption Perceptions Index. In 2020, the Sultanate ranked second in ASEAN after Singapore. The result is impressive,
and Brunei’s rigorous attitude towards corruption suggests further improvement is plausible. This symposium’s invited
speakers will analyse and discuss the mechanism of FDI-related corruption from legal and economic perspectives, usingcase studies from countries in the Asia Pacific. Through the sharing of experiences and best practices, the symposium
contributes towards a deeper understanding of corruption in FDI and its mitigation.

8:00-8:20

Arrival of Guests and Speakers

8:20-8:30

Arrival of the Guest of Honour

8:30-8:35

Recital of Surah Al-Fatihah and Dua

8:35-8:45

Opening Remarks by Dr Nobumichi Teramura (IAS, UBD)

8:45-8:50

Welcome Message by Dk Dr Noor Hasharina binti Pg Hj Hassan (Director of IAS)

8:50-9:30

Keynote Lecture by Professor Luke Nottage (Sydney Law School)

9:30-9:35

Presentation of Token of Appreciation

9:35-9:50

Group Photo

9:50-10:10

Networking Tea

10:10-11:00

First Session: Business and Economic Issues Relating to Corruption(10min-presentation x 3 +20min Discussion

Professor Ahmed Masood Khalid (SBE, UBD): Does corruption hinder FDI
and growth in Asia and beyond?: The grabbing versus helping hand revisited.

-

and Q&A)

A/Professor Bruno Jetin (IAS, UBD): Correlation between the level ofcorruption in host states and the amount of foreign investment into Asian
nations.

-

Dr Mohd Hairul Azrin Haji Besar (SBE, UBD): The accounting measures tocrackdown on corruption in the Asian states.

Moderator: Dr Sazali Zainal Abidin (SBE, UBD)
11:00-12:10(10minSecond Session: Legal Issues Related to Corruption and ISDS in Asia-

presentation x 4 +30min Discussion

Dr Martin Jarrett (Max-Planck Institute): Rebalancing asymmetries between
host states and investors in Asian ISDS. [online]-

and Q&A)

Professor

Justice Anselmo

Reyes(Doshisha

University;

Singapore

International Commercial Court): The use of domestic law to curb corruptionin Asia & elsewhere.
-

Professor Dr Colin Ong KC (Academy of International Dispute Resolution &Professional Negotiations): The standard of proof for corruption allegations in
Asian ISDS.
1-Dr Yueming Yan (Chinese University of Hong Kong): Multi-Tiered
International Anti-Corruption Cooperation in Asia: Treaties Review andProspects. [online]

Moderator: Professor Luke Nottage (Sydney Law School)
12:10-14:00

Working Lunch (on site)

14:00-16:30

Third Session: Country Reports on Corruption and FDI in the Asia-PacificRegion

14:00-15:00

Part 1: East Asia

(10min-South Korea: Professor Joongi Kim (Yonsei Law School) [online]

presentation x 3 +-Japan: Professor Luke Nottage (Sydney Law School) and Dr Nobumichi

30min Discussion
and Q&A)

Teramura (IAS, UBD)-

China: Professor Vivienne Bath (Sydney Law School)

Moderator: Professor Justice Anselmo Reyes (Doshisha University; Singapore
International Commercial Court)
15:00-15:10

Short Break

15:10-16:50

Part 2: South and Southeast Asia

(10min-India: Professor Prabhash Ranjan (Jindal Global Law School) [online]

presentation x 5 +-Thailand: Professor Sirilaksana Khoman (Thammasat University; National

50min Discussion

Anti-Corruption Commission) Professor Sakda Thanitcul (Chulalongkorn

and Q&A)

University [online]) and Professor Luke Nottage (Sydney Law School)-

Indonesia: Professor Simon Butt (Sydney Law School) [online], Mr Antony
Crockett (HSF Hong Kong) and Professor Tim Lindsey (Melbourne Law
School) [online]-

Lao Republic: Dr Romesh Weeramantry (Melbourne Law School; National
University of Singapore; Clifford Chance); Ms Uma Sharma (National
University of Singapore)-

The Philippines: A/Professor Jocelyn Cruz (De La Salle University)

Moderator: Dr Nobumichi Teramura (IAS, UBD)
16:50-17:00

Concluding Remarks by A/Professor Bruno Jetin

2

FIRST SESSION: BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC ISSUES RELATING TO
CORRUPTION
Does Corruption Hinder FDI and Growth in Asia and Beyond? The Grabbing Versus Helping Hand
Revisited.
Professor Ahmed Masood Khalid (SBE, UBD)
Abstract: Corruption is considered a major issue globally, particularly for developing countries as it takes away
important resources resulting in huge cost to the economy. This is especially true in case of attracting foreign
direct investment (FDI) in the host country. However, theoretical literature has counter arguments, somescholars agreeing with the above argument while others suggesting that in some cases, corrupt practices
facilitate business transactions, thus helps to attract FDI. This chapter makes an attempt to further explore thisliterature. We, first provide a review of theoretical and empirical literature on corruption-growth and corruptioninvestment relationships. We also provide interesting details on the cost of corruption as reported in theliterature. Later, we perform some econometrics analysis to verify the ‘gabbing hand’ and ‘helping hand’ viewson the impact of corruption. The empirical findings of this paper support a grabbing hand view for the top 20(least corrupt) countries while the evidence suggest a helping hand view for the bottom 20 (most corrupt)
countries. We also find evidence supporting a non-linear corruption-growth and corruption-investment
relationship for the sample of 20 most corrupt countries. We believe, these are interesting findings and could
have important policy implications.
Ahmed M Khalid holds a PhD in economics from Johns Hopkins University, USA. He joined Universiti Brunei
Darussalam in 2015 as a Professor of Economics. Previously, he worked at the Bond Business School, Australia
and the National University of Singapore. Ahmed has also worked as a consultant with the World Bank andmany international institutions as well as holding visiting faculty positions in different universities. His researchinterests include applied macroeconomics/monetary economics with a focus on financial reforms, regional
integrations and globalization. He currently serves as Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Business and Economic
Analysis and Associate Editor of the Singapore Economic Review as well as member of editorial boards of anumber of regional and international journals.
The Effect of Corruption on Foreign Direct Investment in Asia: “Helping Hand” or “Grabbing Hand”?
A/Professor Bruno Jetin (IAS, UBD), Jamel Saadaoui and Haingo Ratiarison
Abstract: Our presentation looks at the effect of corruption on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) at the worldlevel, in East, South, and Southeast Asia. The academic literature is inconclusive because the nature ofcorruption can be different from one country to another and because various other factors can decide a foreign3company to invest in a country or region despite a relatively high level of corruption. To shed light on the effectof corruption, we proceed to a panel econometrics investigation that assesses the relationship between the stockof FDI and the “control of corruption”, published by the World Bank, for a sample of 180 countries over theperiod 2002-2019. The “control of corruption” is an index, combining 23 different assessments and surveys
capturing perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gains. A low score means thatthe authorities do not fight corruption or are not effective in fighting corruption, and therefore corruption is high,and vice-versa. We include two control variables (real GDP and secondary school enrollment) to better estimate
the specific role of corruption. Our results show that at the world level, the control of corruption is low and it
has a positive effect on FDI, which means that corruption is a stimulus to FDI. However, in Asia, the control ofcorruption is higher, and it has a positive effect on FDI, which means corruption is a “grabbing hand”. It isparticularly the case in East Asia, but not in South Asia, where corruption “helps” foreign investments. In
Southeast Asia, there is no significant relation at the regional level, although for some countries a high level ofcontrol of corruption is associated with a higher level of FDI.
Bruno Jetin is Associate Professor at Universiti Brunei Darussalam (UBD) where he was Director of theInstitute of Asian Studies (2018-2022). Prior to joining UBB, he was a researcher at the Institute for Researchon Contemporary Southeast Asia (IRASEC, CNRS-MAEE, Bangkok) and Associate Professor at the University
Sorbonne Paris Nord where he was Deputy Director of the Research Center in Economics. He holds a PhD in
economics from the University of Sorbonne Paris Nord. His current research areas include ASEAN and the Beltand Road Initiative, foreign investment and trade in Asia-Pacific, income distribution and growth. He is also anexpert of the automobile industry and the electric car.
Jamel Saadaoui is a lecturer and researcher in social sciences, specialized in several topics related tointernational economics. Since 2013, he has been a Senior Lecturer with Habilitation in Economics at the
University of Strasbourg, and has been affiliated to the BETA laboratory for his research activities. Furthermore,he teaches Economics and Statistics at the Faculty of Economics and Management, FSEG, of the University ofStrasbourg. His recent works in applied economics explore the interactions between geopolitical tensions andthe economy, the nature of long-run economic growth, the flattening of the Phillips curve in the EU regions, orthe buffering effects of the international reserve holdings.
Haingo Ratiarison is currently a student at the University of Strasbourg and is following a double training in
Master 1 "Macroeconomics and European policies" and a selective diploma course allowing advanced initiation
to research called “Magistère”. She holds a Bachelor in Economics at the Faculty of Economics andManagement from University of Strasbourg. In addition, she is one of the research assistants of Jamel Saadaoui,
Senior Lecturer and researcher affiliated to the BETA-CNRS laboratory in Strasbourg. Her research interests4are corruption and tax evasion and their macroeconomic effects. She is also interested in development
economics and European macroeconomics.
The Accounting Measures to Crackdown on Corruption in the Asian Context
Dr Masairol Masri and Dr Mohd Hairul Azrin Besar (SBE, UBD)
Abstract: Accounting and financial reporting is part of the corporate governance mechanism tools available inensuring transparent and fair reporting to the shareholders and the stakeholders in general. Financial reports
provide relevant meaningful quantitative and qualitative information for the users in assisting them to makeproper decisions on their investments and relations with the respective corporate entities. The act of recording
the financial transactions per the available international or local financial reporting standards provides a control
mechanism ensuring the corporation's financial dealings are properly reported and activities such as corruption
will be hindered with the reporting requirement. The paper focuses on the impact of financial reporting standards
in curbing corrupt practices by corporations in business dealings through a review of the literature on accounting
standards and corruption. It is observed that the implementation of financial reporting standards, especially theInternational Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS), has a positive impact on combatting corruption in businessdealings and serves as a tool for deterring unlawful financial transactions, notably in countries rated with low
corruption index.
Masairol Haji Masri earned his Ph.D. in Business Administration from Manchester Business School,
University of Manchester, UK. While in Universiti Brunei Darussalam, he has held various administrative
position such as the Deputy Director for Office of Studies, the Deputy Dean of Academic and Administration at
the School of Business and Economics and the Accounting Programme Coordinator. He was also a member ofthe Brunei Darussalam Accounting Standard (BDASC) working committee for Non-Public Interest Entities anda member of the Brunei Darussalam Public Accountant Oversight committee (PAOC) and under Ministry of
Finance and Economics. He is currently a member of the Income Tax Board of Review under Ministry of
Finance and Economics and the Dean of UBD School of Business and Economics.
Mohd Hairul Azrin is currently serving as the Director of Sultan Omar ‘Ali Saifuddien Centre of Islamic
Studies (SOASCIS) and a faculty member at the School of Business and Economics, Universiti Brunei
Darussalam. He has an interest in the field of Accounting, Governance and Islamic Finance. Prior to this he had
been involved in the Brunei Islamic Banking Industry entrusted in Shariah Governance and Audit since the year
2000 and is currently a member of the Shariah Financial Supervisory Board (SFSB). On the academic front, he
has published works and presented papers at several conferences in Governance, Islamic Banking and Finance,

5

Takaful and Financial Reporting. He is also part of the editorial team for the Journal of Islamic Accounting andBusiness Research (JIABR).

6

SECOND SESSION: LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO CORRUPTION ANDISDS IN ASIA
Rebalancing Asymmetries between Host States and Investors in Asian ISDS: An Exception for Systemic
Corruption
Dr Martin Jarrett (Max-Planck Institute) [Online]
Abstract: Consider the following case. An investor is building an apartment-complex. Halfway in, agovernment department demands a bribe, which is business as usual for it. The investor initially resists, but
eventually caves in. Years later, the host state seeks to use the investor's participation in this corruption against
it in an investment-treaty arbitration. The applicable investment treaty stipulates that only lawfully madeinvestments are protected, with the result that the investor must fail.
Any arbitral tribunal would be uncomfortable with this outcome. The degree of wrongfulness of the investor’s
conduct pales in comparison to the host state's, which has let many of its governmental departments becomedens of corruption. But the arbitral tribunal's hands are apparently tied. The applicable investment treaty is clear:
the investor's claim must be denied, with an asymmetric outcome that effectively benefits the state.
This contribution unties arbitral tribunals’ hands. It lays down another path for arbitral tribunals to follow insuch cases, one which avoids this outcome, yet remains honest to the tenets of international investment law.
Martin Jarrett is a Senior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law andInternational Law. He is qualified as a Solicitor and Barrister in New South Wales, Australia and obtained his
doctorate from the University of Mannheim (summa cum laude). His main field of research is international
investment law, particularly the topic of investor misconduct. He has published extensively on this topic,
including the monograph Contributory Fault and investor Misconduct in Investment Arbitration.
The Use of Domestic Law to Curb Corruption in Asia & Elsewhere
Professor Justice Anselmo Reyes (Doshisha University; Singapore International Commercial Court)
Abstract: There are multiple international agreements that require states to criminalise corruption. This chapter
deals with the effects of such international anti-corruption agreements in the field of investment treaty arbitration.
Focus will be placed on Asia. This Asian perspective is pertinent given the continued prevalence of corruption
in many Asian jurisdictions, despite their growing economic importance.

International agreements on

corruption and their implementation in domestic law can have an unintended consequence in the field ofinvestment treaty arbitration. This is because anti-corruption laws can provide states with an effective defence
against an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction. This paper will conclude with a proposal on how this consequence can7be tempered by applying to international investment law, the more nuanced approach to illegality established inrecent common law jurisprudence. The article will be divided into four parts. Part 1 will survey multilateral andbilateral international agreements on corruption. Part 2 will discuss how international agreements on corruption
have been implemented in the domestic laws of various Asian jurisdictions. It will consider differences in anticorruption laws of Asian states and comment on whether such differences give rise to uncertainty as to the scopeof corruption crimes. Part 3 will look into how host states can use anti-corruption laws as a means of evading
the scrutiny by arbitral tribunals of confiscatory conduct. Part 4 will argue that the “all or nothing” approach toinvestments tainted with corruption should be replaced with a balancing approach to illegality.
Anselmo Reyes practises as an arbitrator. He is currently an International Judge at the Singapore International
Commercial Court and a Guest Professor at Doshisha University (Kyoto). He was Professor of Legal Practiceat Hong Kong University from October 2012 to September 2018. Before that, he was a judge of the Hong KongHigh Court from 2003-12, when he was in charge of the Construction and Arbitration List (2004-8) and theCommercial and Admiralty Lists (2008-12). He was Representative of the Hague Conference on Private
International Law's Regional Office Asia Pacific from April 2013 to July 2017. He became an International
Judge of the Singapore International Commercial Court in January 2015 and an Overseas Bencher of the Inner
Temple in October 2015.
The Standard of Proof for Corruption Allegations in Asian ISDS
Professor Dr Colin Ong KC (Academy of International Dispute Resolution & Professional Negotiations)
Abstract: The talk focuses on the issue of pure corruption allegations in Asian ISDS as opposed to the money
laundering issues which take on a different dimension of considerations. Corruption is usually invoked by thestate as a defence against performance of the contract. In the event that it is proven to be true that a claimant
investors procured its original investment through bribery, this may lead to some tribunals, especially in ICSID
cases, denying the investor’s claims. Arbitral tribunals confronted with allegations of corruption face difficult
challenges. They have to balance their duties to the parties with public policy rules but at the same time lack theinvestigative powers of a state. An arbitral tribunal will, in the first place, need to decide which laws or rules
apply to the burden and standard of proof. No arbitral institutions clearly defines corruption nor provide
guidelines on how to deal with evidence of corruption. The Basel Institute on Governance 2019 tool kit isinadequate to deal with the issue of standard of proof for corruption. This paper will discuss the different
approaches and why it is safer to adopt the higher standard of proof of “clear and convincing evidence” test in
Asian ISDS matters.

8Colin Ong is a Chartered Arbitrator, King’s Counsel; Civil Law professor; and Brunei/Singapore lawyer. He
was the 1st ASEAN practising lawyer to be a Master of the Bench of the Inner Temple and Queen’s Counsel(nowKC). Who'sWhoLegal ranks him Thought Leader in Arbitration/Construction/Litigation. Legal500 English
Bar(Asia-Pacific) ranks him a Tier-1 English KC in Energy/Construction. He has sat as arbitrator or acted aslead counsel in over 380 arbitrations in seats across the World. Who’sWhoLegal Thought Leaders describes him
as “One of the most highly regarded arbitration practitioners in Asia. He is extremely well known as arbitrator
and counsel."Multi-Tiered International Anti-Corruption Cooperation in Asia: Treaties Review and Prospects
Dr Yueming Yan (Chinese University of Hong Kong) and Ms Tianyu Liu (Leiden University)
Abstract: Effective international cooperation is essential for combating the pervasive and far-reaching problemof transnational corruption. This chapter focuses on the anti-corruption commitments and cooperation among
Asian countries, particularly in the context of international investment. It firstly examines the legal framework
against corruption in Asia at both the international and regional levels, encompassing both ‘hard law’ and ‘softlaw’ instruments. The specific provisions of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) arealso analyzed, including the establishment of domestic anti-corruption agencies and the role of mutual legal
assistance by Asian countries. In addition, this chapter presents a comprehensive analysis of the anti-corruption
provisions in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) concluded by Asian countries. The treaty review reveals thatprovisions of direct anti-corruption obligations imposed on investors are rare among Asian BITs, whereas
provisions that demonstrate states’ general commitments to combatting corruption and promoting corporatesocial responsibility are more common. This chapter highlights the importance of nuanced intra-Asian
cooperation in addressing corruption, as well as the need to align commitments made under BITs with those ofother international instruments aimed at tackling corruption.
Yueming Yan is an Assistant Professor at Faculty of Law, Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). Her
research areas cover international economic law, sustainable development, China’s law, and empirical legal
studies. She has published in the Journal of International Economic Law and the Asian Journal of WTO &International Health Law and Policy. Before joining CUHK Law, she was a Visiting Assistant Professor at
Singapore Management University Yong Pung How School of Law. Yueming is currently serving as a Co-Chairof the Asia-Pacific Interest Group of the American Society of International Law. Yueming received her PhD
from McGill University.
Tianyu Liu obtained her LL.B. degree with honors from Tsinghua University School of Law. She pursued her
LL.M. with the Global Leaders Scholarship at Duke University School of Law, where she was a board member9

of the International Law Society. She once interned at law firms specializing in dispute resolution andinternational arbitration and worked as a research assistant at Singapore International Dispute Resolution
Academy. She has great interests in public international law and is reading an advanced LL.M. in International
Dispute Settlement and Arbitration at Leiden University in The Hague. Her research currently concerns investorstate arbitration and investment treaties.

10

THIRD SESSION: COUNTRY REPORTS ON CORRUPTION AND FDI IN
THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONSouth Korea
Professor Joongi Kim (Yonsei Law School)
Abstract: This chapter provides an overview of Korea’s investment treaty regime and what type of provisions
it has concerning corruption and illegality and further analyzes how corruption and illegality issues havefeatured in cases related to Korea and Korean investors. Korea has become a leading major exporter andimporter of foreign direct investment (FDI). To protect and promote inbound and outbound investment, Korea
has established one of the most wide-ranging and extensive regime of international investment agreements.
Korea’s investment treaty practice related to corruption and illegality is generally not developed. For instance,
most Korea’s treaties do not include an explicit requirement for the host states to take measures against
corruption. Korean treaties also vary in terms of how they require foreign investments to be made in accordancewith host state laws. At present, there is no indication that Korea may pursue clearer legality provisions. Thisremains the case even though foreign investors have increasing brought cases against Korea in recent years andKorean investors have also been more active in bring claims as well. While the extent that corruption or illegality
features in cases brought by Korean investors remain largely unknown, some of the cases against Korea havecorruption or illegality related elements. It is foreseeable that Korea might become more proactive in promoting
anti-corruption and legality provisions in its future treaties as part of its ongoing commitment to transparency.
Joongi Kim is a Professor of Law at Yonsei University. His research focuses on international dispute resolution,international trade and investment, corporate governance and good governance. He sits on the editorial boardsof International Investment Law and Arbitration (Brill), Asian Journal of Comparative Law (Cambridge
University Press), Dispute Resolution International (IBA) and Korean Arbitration Review. He has been avisiting professor at ESADE, Georgetown, Keio, the National University of Singapore, National Law School ofIndia University (Bangalore), University of Florida and University of Hong Kong.
Japan
Professor Luke Nottage (Sydney Law School) and Dr Nobumichi Teramura (IAS, UBD)
Abstract: Japan has high outbound and low low inbound FDI (Part II), low corruption (Part III), and abelatedly accelerating program of ISDS-backed investment treaties (Part IV.1). Japan’s investment treaty
practice on corruption and illegality is comparatively interesting for two reasons (Part IV.2). First, from around2007, its treaties have often required host states to take measures against corruption. This should help Japan’s
11

outbound investors, but these obligations are generally weakly phrased. Secondly, Japan’s treaties have beenless consistent in expressly limiting their protections to foreign investments made in accordance with host statelaws (including against corruption). This may be due to treaty drafters from Japan and counterparty states being
less aware of the significance of such express legality provisions, which will often lead tribunals to decline
jurisdiction if corruption is established, thus leaving foreign investors without treaty protections. Such outcomesmay also incentivise host states to ensure a bribe is taken, to use as a treaty defence if foreign investors everlaunch treaty claims, whereas other outcomes for tribunals are possible if there is no express legality provision.
Another possibility is that this drafting is deliberate, again to benefit Japanese outbound investors as claimants
because the absence of a legality provision renders more difficult defences from host states, which typicallyhave more corruption than in Japan.
Japan may adopt more and clearer legality provisions if it becomes subject to more inbound ISDS arbitration
claims, and/or if claims by Japanese outbound investors are mostly against well-governed host states with little
scope for corruption. Yet both types of claims remain few (Part V). The shift may therefore come more fromother counterparty states pushing for such legality provisions and Japan agreeing in its future treaties todemonstrate its overall commitment to combatting corruption, and to preserve the legitimacy of the ISDS
arbitration system (Part VI).
Luke Nottage (PhD VUW, LLD Kyoto) is Professor of Comparative and Transnational Business Law at Sydney
Law School, specialising in arbitration, contract and consumer law, and corporate governance, with a particularinterest in Japan and the Asia-Pacific. He is founding Co-Director of the Australian Network for Japanese Law(ANJeL), Associate Director of the Centre for Asian and Pacific Law at the University of Sydney (CAPLUS),
and Special Counsel with Williams Trade Law. Luke has consulted for law firms world-wide as well as ASEAN,
the European Commission, OECD, UNCTAD, UNDP and the Governments of Japan and Saudi Arabia. Lukeis also a Rules committee member of ACICA and on the Panel of Arbitrators for the AIAC (KLRCA), BIAC,
CAAI, JCAA, KCAB, NZIAC, SCIA and TAI. Luke was Visiting Professor at Universiti Brunei Darussalam in2020 and 2023.
Nobumichi Teramura is Assistant Professor of the Institute of Asian Studies, University of Brunei Darussalam
and Affiliate at the University of Sydney Law School Centre for Asian and Pacific Law, specialising in business
law, with a particular interest in arbitration, private international law, contract law and Asian law. He has
published and presented his research in various journals and academic conferences in different jurisdictions inEnglish and Japanese. He has taught private international law and commercial law as a Lecturer at the Adelaide
Law School (2019). He has also lectured at the College of Law of De La Salle University in the Philippines in
2016, 2017 and 2019 on international arbitration and trade law.
12

ChinaProfessor Vivienne Bath (Sydney Law School) and Ms Tianqi Gu (Sydney Law School)
Abstract: Since the Chinese government decided in the late 1970s to open mainland China up to investment,
foreign direct investment (FDI) into China (and Hong Kong) has rapidly increased. In conjunction with thisgrowth and investment, China has developed a very substantial network of international investment agreements(IIAs), while Hong Kong has also signed a number of IIAs in its own name.
Government and business corruption and bribery has been a problem in both jurisdictions, although both China
and Hong Kong have taken active steps to criminalise and to investigate and prosecute corruption, particularly
at the governmental level and to participate in major international initiatives relating to corruption. Whilecorruption has, so far, made a limited appearance in ISDS cases against China and cases brought by Chinese orHong Kong investors, based on existing material, a number of tentative conclusions and recommendations canbe made: China should play a more active role in prosecuting bribery by its enterprises outside China andimprove transparency in relation to domestic corruption investigations and prosecutions; secondly, China should
move towards a higher level of transparency in relation to ISDS cases and, finally, China should consider
including provisions relating to corruption in its future IIAs.
Vivienne Bath is Professor of Chinese and International Business Law at Sydney Law School and Associate
Director – International of the Centre for Asian and Pacific Law at the University of Sydney and a SeniorResearch Fellow of the Asia IP and Technology Law Project at the University of California, Berkeley, Schoolof Law. Her teaching and research interests are in international business and economic law, private internationallaw and Chinese law. She has studied in Australia, the United States, China and Germany and has extensive
professional experience in Sydney, New York and Hong Kong, specialising in foreign investment andcommercial transactions in China and the Asian region.
Tianqi Gu is a PhD candidate at the Sydney Law School, working on Reforms on Chinese State-Owned
Enterprises and Chinese Outbound Investment. She holds an LLB from Dalian Maritime University (China),
and LLMs from University College London and the University of Sydney respectively. She is also the holder
of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.
India
Professor Prabhash Ranjan (Jindal Global Law School) [online]
Abstract: In recent times, there have been plentiful instances where corruption has been an important issue indisputes between foreign investors and States in front of numerous investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS)
13

tribunals. Against this backdrop, this chapter examines the issue of corruption in bilateral investment treaties(BITs) of India, which includes a discussion on one key ISDS case where corruption has been an issue – Devas
v. India. In this case, India raised the argument of fraud against the investor though towards the fag end of theproceedings. Consequently, it did not affect the ruling against India. The chapter also finds that in the BITs thatIndia signed in the 1990s and 2000s, corruption-related provisions did not figure prominently. This started tochange with India’s new investment treaty practice that was inaugurated by the 2016 Model BIT. Given the way
the issue of corruption has acquired prominence in international investment law debates in general and in ISDS,
this is a welcome development. At the same time, using the case study of Devas v India, the chapter argues that
corruption should not become a smokescreen for denying a foreign investor to bring an ISDS claim against theState.
Prabhash Ranjan is a Professor and Vice Dean (Continuing Education) at the Jindal Global Law School, O P
Jindal Global University (JGU). He is currently on leave from South Asian University where he is an Associate
Professor. He holds a Ph.D. in law from King’s College London and is a recipient of the British Chevening
Scholarship. Prabhash teaches and publishes in the area of international investment law and international tradelaw. He has been a Visiting Scholar at Brookings India and a Visiting Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre forInternational Law, Cambridge University. He was a member of the team that drafted the 260th report of the Law
Commission of India on the 2015 draft model Indian bilateral investment treaty.
ThailandProfessor Sirilaksana Khoman (Thammasat University; National Anti-Corruption Commission), Professor
Sakda Thanitcul (Chulalongkorn University [online]) and Professor Luke Nottage (Sydney Law School)
Abstract: Thailand’s economy has developed strongly by consistently attracting foreign investment especiallysince the 1980s (Part 2), despite political upheavals and persistent corruption amidst ongoing challenges (Part3). It has also expanded the numbers and scopes of its investment treaties, including more options for ISDS
arbitrations to enforce substantive commitments to foreign investors (Part 4.1), resulting in a few treaty-based
arbitrations as well as some contract-based arbitrations involving foreign investors (Part 4.2). A few, and theKingsgate v Thailand claim under TAFTA since 2017, have involved allegations and investigations concerning
corruption and other serious illegal behaviour (Part 5). As reiterated in the conclusion (Part 6), corruption
investigations and court proceedings are necessarily very lengthy, sometimes more so than the time taken to
generate and enforce final awards in large (especially treaty-based) investment arbitrations. To reduce theconsequent risk of enforcing an award that later proves to be based on seriously corrupt conduct, one solution
may be for investment treaty arbitrators to apply the same higher standard of proof that corruption investigatorsand criminal courts need to apply, although this will mean more delays and perhaps costs in arbitration. Secondly,
14

more transparency could be added to Thailand-related investment arbitration proceedings, so that the public at
least knows that corruption is being alleged.
Sirilaksana Khoman is Vice Chair of the Foundation for Public Policy and Good Governance (PPGG) andformer Advisor to the Commissioner and Chair of the Economic Sector Corruption Prevention at Thailand’s
National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). She was Dean of the Faculty of Economics, Thammasat
University, Thailand, and International Consultant for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in Vienna.
She received her Bachelor and Master’s degrees in Economics from the Australian National University, her
Ph.D in Economics from the University of Hawaii, and a Certificate in International Trade Regulation from
Harvard Law School.
Sakda Thanitcul is currently a professor of law at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. He teaches
competition law, international economic law, tort and product liability law. He is presently serving as a Memberof the Committee on Foreign Business Act and a Member of the Committee on Anti-Dumping. Professor Sakda
Thanitcul holds a Bachelor of Law degree from Chulalongkorn University, Master of Law degrees from Kyoto
University and University of Washington, Doctor of Law degrees from Kyoto University and University ofWashington.
Indonesia
Professor Simon Butt (Sydney Law School) [online], Mr Antony Crockett (HSF Hong Kong) and Professor
Tim Lindsey (Melbourne Law School) [online]
Abstract: Indonesia is notorious for high levels of corruption. This has remained the case in spite of significant
reforms since the collapse of the Soeharto government in 1998. This chapter briefly introduces some of the key
law reforms which have sought to address corruption in Indonesia as well as ongoing concerns regarding highlevels of corruption in the judicial system, which is one of the factors leading investors in Indonesia to preferarbitration for resolving disputes. The chapter then considers the legal framework for international commercial
arbitration in Indonesia, particularly relating to enforcement of arbitration awards and recent changes toIndonesia's policy relating to investment treaties and investor-State dispute resolution. The chapter includes
consideration of two investor-State arbitrations involving Indonesia which featured allegations of corruption.
Simon Butt is Director of the Centre for Asian and Pacific Law at the University of Sydney Law School(CAPLUS).He also serves on the Executive of the Sydney Southeast Asia Centre (SSEAC). Fluent in Indonesian,Simon has consulted on Indonesian law to the private and public sectors, and has provided advice and expert
opinions about Indonesian law for litigation in the US, UK, Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia.

15

Antony Crockett is a Partner with international law firm Herbert Smith Freehills. From 2015 to 2017 Antony
worked in Jakarta as a Foreign Legal Consultant with Hiswara Bunjamin & Tandjung (on secondment from his
current firm). He holds the degrees LLM (Distinction) from the London School of Economics and Political
Science and LLB (Hons) and BSc from the University of Melbourne. Antony specialises in complex crossborder dispute resolution, including international commercial arbitration and investment treaty arbitration. He
has acted as counsel to both investors and States in investor-State disputes. Antony is admitted to practice inAustralia (Victoria), England & Wales and Hong Kong SAR.
Tim Lindsey is one of Australia’s leading experts on Indonesian law, and has advised governments, business,international organisations, courts and legal practitioners in Indonesia and Australia. He is Malcolm Smith
Professor of Asian Law, Redmond Barry Distinguished Professor and Director of the Centre for Indonesian Law,
Islam and Society at the Melbourne Law School. He holds a Bachelor of Laws, Bachelor of Arts and Bachelorof Letters from the University of Melbourne and completed his PhD thesis in Indonesian studies. A specialist ina wide range of aspects of Indonesian law, including public law, criminal law, commercial law, and family law,
he also teaches and researches shari'a (Islamic law) in Indonesia and Southeast Asia. He has won national anduniversity teaching awards, and was an ARC Federation Fellow from 2006 to 2011.
Lao PDRDr Romesh Weeramantry (Melbourne Law School; National University of Singapore; Clifford Chance) andMs Uma Sharma (National University of Singapore; TSMP Law)
Abstract: In recent years, corruption has become prevalent in investment arbitration. This chapter closely
examines the issue of corruption in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic through the lens of two key
investment-treaty arbitration decisions. The decisions place a spotlight on how tribunals address allegations offraud and corruption, and also the larger systemic issues which plague the Lao People’s Democratic Republic.
This chapter thoroughly analyses the decisions and discusses their implications on the conduct of arbitralproceedings. It is envisaged that these observations will provide a guide for practitioners navigating allegationsof corruption in investment treaty arbitration proceedings while contextualising the socio-political environment
within which such grafting is perpetuated.
Romesh Weeramantry is a Special Counsel in the International Arbitration and Dispute Resolution practice ofClifford Chance. He specialises in public international law and investment treaty claims. His publications
include: International Commercial Arbitration: An Asia-Pacific Perspective (Kluwer 2023); The Hong Kong
Arbitration Ordinance: Commentary and Annotations (2nd edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2015) (General Editor);
Treaty Interpretation in Investment Arbitration (Oxford UP 2012). He is Global Fellow at the National
16

University of Singapore Centre for International Law; a Senior Fellow at the University of Melbourne Law
School; a General Editor of the Asian Dispute Review, a member of the Editorial Board of the ICSID Review;
and was a member of the IBA Sub-Committee on Investment Treaty Arbitration.
Uma Sharma is a dual-qualified (England & Wales, and Singapore) Senior Associate focusing her practice on
dispute resolution and international arbitration, including proceedings conducted under the ICC and SIAC Rules.
Uma represents clients in commercial litigation and arbitration-related disputes at all levels of the Singapore
Courts, and also has broad experience advising on general transnational trust matters. Uma was a Teaching
Assistant and facilitator for the Advanced Practicum in International Arbitration module at the National
University of Singapore for three consecutive years. Prior to joining private practice, Uma was a legal internwith the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes in Washington DC and worked together
with Professor Lucy Reed at the Centre for International Law in Singapore.
The Philippines
Dr Thomas Elliot Mondez (The Court of Appeals, the Philippines) and A/Professor Jocelyn P Cruz (De La
Salle University)
Abstract: Corruption is deeply rooted in Philippine culture. Much legislation was passed to strengthen the
country’s legal frameworks to prosecute corruption cases. However, the abundant local anti-corruption laws
have yet to produce the desired results. For the most of the latter half of the 20th Century, the Philippines reliedon protectionist policies, conducive to corruption, to shelter its domestic economy from the burgeoning highly
competitive international markets. The succeeding adoption of trade liberalization polices enabled the country
to attract foreign investments to bolster its economy. Unfortunately, it also exposed investors to the pitfalls of
local corruption. The country’s first major investment dispute involving its main international airport was not apleasant experience. The Philippines is no longer in a bubble. As an active member of the international
community, it must adjust its law enforcement efforts, legal systems, treaty practice, and business culture tomatch global anti-corruption standards.
Thoams Elliot Mondez is the chief of staff of the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals, the second highest
court of the Philippines. He is concurrently a professional lecturer at De La Salle University in Manila. He
previously worked for the House of Representatives and the Department of Justice. He is the author of the bookGeopolitics and International Law.
Jocelyn P Cruz is a full-time Commercial Law Department faculty member at Ramon V. Del Rosario Collegeof Business. She was the department’s former Chair and handled various administrative positions, including17Vice Dean of the College of business and economics, College of Law, Graduate School Coordinator, andExternal Director. She authored various research in the field of Law and Education.

18