Conflicting Ideas On The Exequatur Process
- Tatoli
- Jun 17, 2025
- 4 min read
Steering Towards ASEAN-Centric Principles
OPINION
In 2022, total ASEAN merchandise trade rose 14.9%, reaching US$ 3.846 trillion, with
intra‐ASEAN trade accounting for 22.1% of total exports. This signifies ASEAN’s growing
interdependence and highlights the urgent need for a streamlined exequatur process to ensure cross-border disputes are resolved swiftly and fairly. The exequatur process refers to the process by which foreign judgments are recognised and enforced in its domestic jurisdiction. This process can be applied in various fields such as the commercial sector, legal frameworks, etc. Specifically, whether blanket legal binding policies should be implemented across ASEAN or whether domestic issues should be handled independently; furthermore, the ASEAN Law Ministers Meeting engages in discussions on how ASEAN members should streamline the exequatur process.
Implications
Enforcement and Recognition of Foreign Judgments:
Since the exequatur translates a foreign judgment into an enforceable order within domestic law jurisdiction, separate foreign affairs get involved in the process, with different opinions and approaches to the judgment; disputes arise between foreign judgments and domestic policies. These decisions are heavily influenced by the nation's cultural and historical contexts.
Varied National Laws:
The specific requirements and procedures for exequatur can vary significantly between ASEAN members, increasing the complexity of cross-border enforcement, such as blanket policies. That said, domestic courts may refuse to enforce foreign judgments if they violate the policies of the enforcing jurisdiction.
Impact on International Trade and Commerce:
The exequatur process allows for international trade and commercial activity by enabling
businesses to enforce contracts and collect debts across ASEAN nations.
Thus, streamlining the exequatur process saves time and costs, ensuring efficient enforcement.
Conflicting Ideas in ALAWMM Council
The main distinction that sets apart nations is the question of legally binding policies across
ASEAN. In contrast with advisory approaches, these policies ensure that laws are implemented in all ASEAN member states, creating a standardized and blanketed framework. Some nations have expressed their support for legally binding policies, citing reasons such as smoother processes and easier regulation. One branch of political cases has seen the most intense divide: should all commercial cases that concern multiple countries be legally binding? While members of the ASEAN states voiced out strongly for advisory methods, the majority of the delegations of observer states, such as Japan, New Zealand, and the United States, have been firmly advocating for cases to be legally binding.
As the United States has advocated, “If commercial cases are not legally binding and instead
adopt an advice-based system, this provides ample freedom for ASEAN countries to ignore
advice given.” This can result in foreign investors feeling uneasy and hence decreasing the
economic opportunities for ASEAN countries.”
However, the implementation of legally binding policies raises the issue of infringement of
national sovereignty and rights. ASEAN countries, along with Timor-Leste, have voiced their
concerns on how legally binding frameworks put countries' authority over their legislature at risk. “Internal affairs should not be subjected to out-of-state legislature,” Brunei highlights.
Should Timor-Leste Be Concerned?
As solutions on whether policies should be legal or advisory are discussed in ALAWMM,
Timor-Leste is indirectly impacted, being an observer state in the council. This affects the extent to which streamlined exequatur can be practiced between Timor-Leste and ASEAN states.
"I am all for the ASEAN principles."
During the discussion, Timor-Leste conveyed its priorities to other ASEAN member states,
emphasizing its alignment with the ASEAN core principle, stating that it was against binding
policies that applied throughout ASEAN. Timor-Leste further stated,
“The ASEAN member states will continue to engage in discussion; everything implemented will be advisory, barring certain trade regulations with consensus from all ASEAN members.
What we want to push for is having nations involved to discuss each other's foreign judgments instead of implementing binding policies, following the ASEAN core principles.”
The Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, as part of the core principles of ASEAN, states the mutual respect of independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity, and national identity. This further states the non-interference with each nation's domestic affairs, highlighting the importance of the peaceful settlement of disputes and effective cooperation. This principle of effective cooperation directly translates into the discussions made in ALAWMM to streamline the exequatur process. Timor-Leste continues to align itself with ASEAN and its core principles, continuing to encourage member states to cooperate in creating advisory frameworks and to respect each nation's cultural contexts to better streamline the exequatur process, achieving common goals and enhanced regional integration. ASEAN members, alongside Timor-Leste, should continue to promote ASEAN-centric principles and abide by them, avoiding blanket and legally binding policies that do not factor in the individual member states' contexts and risk overly infringing on domestic affairs. ASEAN members should continue to work and cooperate effectively, stepping towards purely advisory solutions, respecting all ASEAN member states.
Written by Tan Chee Han Asher, Woo Shao Jie, Li Yunxuan
Bibliography
1. ASEAN. “What We Do.” Association of Southeast Asian Nations, 2020.
———. “You Are Being Redirected...” asean.org, n.d.
ommunity/treaty-of-amity-and-cooperation-in-southeast-asia-tac/.
2. “ASEAN STATISTICAL HIGHLIGHTS 2023,” n.d.
Comments