Different Asean Agreement

Traditionally, ASEAN national authorities have also been reluctant to share or cede sovereignty to the authorities of other ASEAN members (although ASEAN trade ministries regularly conduct cross-border visits to carry out on-site inspections as part of anti-dumping investigations). Unlike the EU or NAFTA, joint enforcement and enforcement teams are not widespread. Instead, ASEAN national authorities must rely on the verification and analysis of other ASEAN national authorities to determine whether AFTA measures, such as the rule of origin, are being complied with. Discrepancies may arise between national authorities. Again, the ASEAN secretariat can help resolve a dispute, but does not have the legal authority to resolve it. The AFTA agreement was signed in Singapore on 28 January 1992. When the AFTA agreement was originally signed, ASEAN had six members, namely Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Vietnam joined in 1995, Laos and Myanmar in 1997 and Cambodia in 1999. AFTA now includes the ten ASEAN countries. The four latecomers had to sign the AFTA agreement to join ASEAN, but were given longer deadlines to meet AFTA`s tariff reduction obligations.

The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) [1] is a trade bloc agreement concluded by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations that supports local trade and production in all ASEAN countries and facilitates economic integration with regional and international allies. [2] [3] [4] Considered one of the most important and important free trade areas in the world, it has promoted, with its network of dialogue partners, some of the world`s largest multilateral forums and blocs, including the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, the East Asia Summit and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] The exporter must obtain from its national government a ”Form D” certificate attesting that the case has met the 40% requirement. Form D must be submitted to the customs authority of the importing government to qualify for the CEPT rate. Difficulties have sometimes arisen with regard to proof of affirmation and how ASEAN national customs authorities can verify Form D submissions. These difficulties are due to the fact that each ASEAN national customs authority interprets and implements the requirements of Form D without much coordination. For sensitive agricultural products such as rice, ASEAN members have until 2010 to reduce tariffs to 0-5%. The CEPT applies only to products originating in ASEAN. The general rule is that ASEAN local content must represent at least 40% of the FOB value of the case. The local content of ASEAN can be cumulative, i.e.

the value of the contributions of the different ASEAN members can be combined to meet the 40% requirement. The following formula is used: the recent ASEAN meeting was also followed by: the protocol has almost never been used because of the role played by SEOM in the dispute settlement process. Seom`s decisions require consensus among all ASEAN members and, since both the injured party and the alleged transgressor participate in SEOM, such a consensus cannot be reached. This discourages ASEAN members from availing themselves of the protocol and often seeks dispute settlement in other for a, such as the WTO or even the International Court of Justice. It can also be frustrating for companies involved in an afta dispute, as they do not have the right to invoke dispute settlement, but their ASEAN home government may not be willing to invoke the protocol. The ASEAN Secretary General considered that dispute settlement was necessary for the proper management of AFTA and AEC. However, some products are subject to special rules: the main mechanism for achieving these objectives is the common system of effective preferential tariffs, which in 1992 established a progressive timetable to increase the region`s competitive advantage as a base for production oriented towards the world market. .