At a time of global uncertainty in trade and investment regimes, Singapore’s investment policy-makers have been involved in negotiating ‘next generation’amendments to the Singapore-Australia Free Trade Agreement, while also resurrecting a familiar framework where necessary or expedient – i.e., bifurcating EU-Singapore trade and investment commitments into two separate agreements; namely, the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement and EU-Singapore Investment Protection Agreement.Singapore Courts are also prepared to review investment treaty-based arbitral awards afresh. Kingdom of Lesotho v Swissborough Diamond Mines is the second case where an investor-State arbitral tribunal’s award was closely scrutinized by the country’s apex court, and the in this instance the Singapore Court of Appeal held that the arbitral tribunal did not have jurisdiction and ultimately set aside the arbitral award. Analyzing these developments, this chapter suggests that Singapore is emerging as a standard-setter in investment policy and investor-state dispute settlement jurisprudence via the interpretation of investment-related treaty provisions.

Although the substantive content of international investment law has traditionally been shaped by the capital-exporting States of Western Europe and North America, this dynamic has been gradually changing, with Asia and Asian States increasing in the prominence of their roles.Asia has become a global growth engine in recent years, and Asia has become a focal point in rule-making in international investment law.This is evidenced by the number of mega-regional and investment agreements which have been concluded in recent years which have Asia as their centre of gravity, such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, which have built on the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement.To this can be added the practice of individual States, such as Singapore and Vietnam, in negotiating investment protection agreements with the EU, as well as the Singapore Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation which placed Asia at the centre of developments in international commercial law.This chapter surveys the rich terrain of State practice in international investment law, and introduces the various chapters of this edited collection, which illustrate the Asian Turn in Foreign Investment.

The Myanmar Investment Law (“MIL”) and related statutory and institutional reforms (such as the Myanmar Investment Commission) seek to provide a level playing field for local and foreign investors; ensure adequate investor protections to promote investor confidence; and provide a nascent grievance mechanism for the settlement of an investor-State dispute.This chapter examines the framework and structure that the MIL advances to protect investors; and at the same time, to preserve Myanmar’s regulatory authority to pursue legitimate objectives that are consistent with international investment law, such as to prohibit investments that are contrary to the public interest, and to adopt reasonable measures to protect it.