Balancing National Sovereignty and the Efficiency of Cross-Border Asset Enforcement: Toward an ASEAN Framework for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Court Judgments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65310/hs633173Keywords:
Private International Law, Judicial Autonomy, Asset Recovery, Cross-Border Enforcement, Regional Integration.Abstract
This study examines the institutional conflict between state sovereignty and transnational enforcement efficiency within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, focusing specifically on the conservative legal frameworks of Indonesia and Thailand. Utilizing a non-empirical doctrinal legal method and macro-comparative analysis, the investigation deconstructs the systemic barriers generated by traditional territorial enforcement paradigms that refuse to recognize foreign judicial decrees directly. The current domestic requirements for comprehensive re-litigation multiply corporate transaction costs, cause prolonged procedural delays, and undermine cross-border asset recovery mechanisms within the regional market. To resolve this regional enforcement gap, this study designs a normatively viable regional blueprint titled the ASEAN Framework for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments. By adapting global circulation standards from the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 and the Brussels I Recast Regulation, the proposed model introduces a streamlined registration tracking mechanism balanced with a restrictive grounds for refusal matrix. This integrated architectural framework successfully eliminates structural legal duplication, secures cross-border data privacy, and combats transnational financial crimes while preserving the foundational judicial autonomy of individual member nations.
Downloads
References
Allison, A. (2025). Role Of International Law in Combating Cross-Border Cybercrime: Addressing Jurisdictional and Enforcement Challenges.
Cheshire, G. C., North, P. M., & Fawcett, J. J. (2017). Cheshire, North & Fawcett: Private international law (15th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Chong, A. (2024). “Asian” Principles for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments? Singapore as a Case Study. The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, 12(1), 57-72.
Dan, B., & Tao, W. (2025). Bridging the accountability gap: designing a China-Japan-Korea judicial cooperation framework for transboundary marine plastic pollution. Frontiers in Marine Science, 12, 1720926.
Garcimartín, F., & Saumier, G. (2020). Explanatory report on the 2019 HCCH judgments convention. Hague Conference on Private International Law. (Catatan: Laporan penjelasan resmi ini ditulis oleh dua profesor bertindak sebagai Rapporteurs).
Hague Conference on Private International Law. (2019). Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil or commercial matters. Hague Conference on Private International Law Official Website.
He, J. (2026). Exceptions to the Principle of Non-Extradition of Nationals: A Comparative Analysis of Extradition Practices between the European Union and China. International Journal of Asian Social Science Research, 3(1), 48-60.
Hoang Tu Linh, T. (2025). Commercial arbitration in Asia: legal developments and regional dynamics from an ASEAN perspective. Asia Pacific Law Review, 33(2), 316-341.
Ikram, M. D., Kristiawanto, K., & Suasoongnern, S. (2026). State Loss Assessment in Transnational Corruption: Strengthening International Cooperation and Asset Recovery: State Loss Assessment in Transnational Corruption: Strengthening International Cooperation and Asset Recovery. PENA LAW: International Journal of Law, 4(1).
Jain, M., & Badger, S. (2025). Reconciling Universalism & Territorialism in India's Proposed Cross-Border Insolvency Regime: Lessons from the UNCITRAL Model Law. Available at SSRN 5747343.
Kazangarare, C. N. (2024). Cross-Border Insolvency In The Age Of Globalisation: Harmonising Domestic Laws With International Best Practices. Journal of Corporate and Commercial Law and Practice, 10(1), 30-54.
Keputusan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 34 Tahun 1981 tentang Pengesahan Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1981).
Khan, M. N. I. (2025). Cross-border data privacy and legal support: a systematic review of international compliance standards and cyber law practices.
Khanderia, S. (2025). Thorn in the Lion’s Paw: Révision au fond as India’s Self-Inflicted Injury in the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 20(2), 217-240.
Meher, M., & Kurniati, A. (2026). Law Evasion through Choice of Law Clauses in International Business Contracts: An Indonesian Study. Kosmik Hukum, 26(2), 448-464.
Mery, L., Wulandari, A. S. R., Patawari, P., & Nurmiati, N. (2024). Indonesia's Strategic Role in the Development of International Law in the ASEAN Community. Tirtayasa Journal of International Law, 3(1), 33-69.
Mills, A. (2009). The confluence of public and private international law. Cambridge University Press.
Nabiebu, M., Ijiomah, A., Ekpo, M. E., & Agube, N. (2025). Harmonization vs. Fragmentation: The Struggle to Govern Cross-Border Data in Trade Agreements. Advances in Law, Pedagogy, and Multidisciplinary Humanities, 3(1), 173-190.
Okoli, C. S. A. (2022). The recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil and commercial matters in Asia. Journal of Private International Law, 18(3), 522-541.
Park, W. W. (2020). Arbitration and transnational legal order. Oxford University Press.
Pramudita, W. S. D., & Widyawati, A. (2025). Transnational Enforcement Through the Indonesia–Singapore Extradition Framework Against Corruption. JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW, 8(3), 2481-2495.
Reglement op de Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering [Rv] (Negara Belanda), art. 436.
Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I Recast), Official Journal of the European Union, L 351/1.
Salem, H. (2025). Cross-border enforcement of copyright: A special emphasis on court decisions and arbitral awards (No. 217). Research Paper.
Shami, A. Z. A., Asghar, U., & Haider, A. (2025). The Role of International Law in Regulating Cybersecurity: A Critical Analysis of Existing Frameworks and Future Directions. Liberal Journal of Language & Literature Review, 3(3), 224-242.
Singh, V. K. (2025). Internationalization of Cross Border Insolvency Regime-Pondering upon a G20 Model. Available at SSRN 5393945.
Stone, P. (2018). Private international law in the European Union. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Sultan, T. R. (2026). Bridging Theory and Practice: A Review of Sovereign Immunity from Execution and International Arbitration by Ylli Dautaj. Arbitration Law Review (2009-Present), 17(1), 72-99.
Swaiss, A. (2024). Beyond Borders, Beyond Certainty: A Critical Analysis of Legal Frameworks for Sovereign Wealth Fund Investments. Beyond Certainty: A Critical Analysis of Legal Frameworks for Sovereign Wealth Fund Investments (March 16, 2024).
Tuliakov, V. (2025). Transnational criminal law, sovereignty and international justice: Harmonization challenges and policy evolution. International Annals of Criminology, 1-23.
Ubanyionwu, C. J. (2025). Examination of the legal frameworks for combating transnational crime and terrorism. Nnamdi Azikiwe University Journal of International Law and Jurisprudence, 16(1), 61-74.
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (1999).
United Nations. (1958). Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards (New York Convention). United Nations Treaty Series, 330, 3.
Wibowo, A. (2023). Barriers and solutions to cross-border asset recovery. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 26(4), 739-750.
