The Singapore Law Gazette

ASEAN Needs More Transnational and Comparative Lawyers

To turn ASEAN’s big agreements into real impact, Singapore lawyers must think and work beyond borders. In this commentary, Associate Professors of Law Jaclyn L Neo and Tan Hsien-Li from the National University of Singapore draw from their work to advocate for a stronger transnational, comparative law culture to support the region’s integration and shared future.

The ASEAN Summit in October wrapped up in much pomp and pageantry. In its wake are major milestones such as the KL Peace Accord that set a peace deal between Cambodia and Thailand, the admission of Timor-Leste as the eleventh member, and the signing of the upgraded ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement and the upgraded ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement – achievements that deepen intraregional and external relations in this fractious geopolitical environment. There were also renewed pledges focusing on the national plane – the ASEAN Circular Economy Framework and a joint commitment to enhance regional housing resilience and smart city connectivity. These milestones illustrate ASEAN’s ambitions for economic, political, and social integration. But amid the flurry of activity, one question often goes unasked: where does law fit into all of this?

The success of any ASEAN pact depends on implementation via an intricate web of laws and institutions spanning the international, regional and national levels. Without a coherent legal framework, the boldest regional ambitions remain rhetoric. Having a sovereignty-centric and intergovernmental culture, ASEAN integration does not need – nor want – to resemble the European Union’s model of binding supranationalism. After almost two decades of ASEAN Charter-propelled integration, ASEAN has developed its own rules-based framework of “concordance legalisation” that emphasises dynamic economic, political and social agenda expansion through hard and soft laws.¹Tan Hsien Li, “Intergovernmental Yet Dynamically Expansive: Concordance Legalization as an Alternative Regional Trading Arrangement in ASEAN and Beyond”, 33(2) European Journal of International Law (2022) 341. Aligned with the ASEAN Way of consensus-building and sovereignty-centrism, intraregional accountability and compliance are exerted, not primarily through hard arbitral enforcement but by softer, rules-based monitoring and institutional engagement.

Within this context, lawyers play a crucial but often understated role of rendering the international and regional into the national. They are the translators of regional commitments into enforceable contracts, national legislation and business practices. Transnational lawyers should be able to help clients access regional markets and align with emerging regulatory standards, while offering them strategic counsel and support in identifying potential business opportunities. By advising companies on compliance, risk and opportunities available in the ASEAN region, lawyers can convert macro-level commitments into business advantage and competitiveness and streamline day-to-day practices for their clients. To do this, lawyers will increasingly need to be familiar with the various ASEAN instruments that affect cross-border trade and transactions.

At the same time, most cross-border trade and transactions are and will still be governed by national laws. As such, to truly capitalise on ASEAN’s growing economic integration and cross-border cooperation, lawyers will also need to be equipped with the skills and knowledge to access the diverse national laws and legal systems that operate across ASEAN member states.

This is by no means a simple task. ASEAN is a region with diverse legal systems that draw from many different traditions – civil law, common law, Islamic law and customary law. This diversity reflects the region’s complex historical, cultural and colonial legacies. Singapore lawyers must understand and be able to connect and converse across these diverse legal traditions. They may not need to be experts in every ASEAN jurisdiction, but they must have the cultural and legal literacy to recognise how different systems operate.

For that reason, transnational and comparative legal understanding must begin early as a central pillar of legal education, broadly speaking. Introducing law students from the outset to the varied ways in which our neighbours legislate, interpret and reason about law is crucial as it nurtures an appreciation of law as a regional and relational enterprise. At Singapore’s law schools, courses such as Legal Systems in Asia (NUS Law) and Comparative Legal Systems (SMU Law) already expose students to the diversity of legal frameworks. In addition, the ASEAN Law and Policy course (NUS Law) helps students to understand how geopolitics and the global economy influence how the regional legal architecture evolves, and consequently how this architecture operates within the rules-based international order. These courses do more than teach different laws; they train students to think internationally, regionally, transnationally and comparatively, to ask why laws differ, and to understand how external and domestic contexts shape law-making and legal reasoning. In a nutshell, these courses train future generations of lawyers with the ability to navigate this diverse legal landscape. This is vital for lawyers who will increasingly be expected to operate confidently in a multi-jurisdictional environment.

In addition, transnational and comparative learning must also be a pillar of continuous professional training. Today’s legal professionals, including corporate counsels and regulators, will need to be equipped with the legal literacy and cultural fluency necessary to navigate the diverse legal traditions, regulatory systems, and dispute resolution mechanisms across ASEAN. They must be equipped not only with technical expertise but also with the comparative mindset to anticipate how legal differences affect outcomes. Their professional repertoire must include the ability to identify commonalities and divergences among legal systems, appreciate the policy choices behind different legal frameworks, and anticipate how transnational legal issues may unfold in cross-border transactions, arbitration and compliance work. A corporate counsel in Singapore advising on a regional acquisition, or a litigator in Manila handling a cross-border enforcement case, cannot afford to view the law solely through a domestic lens. Even if they rely on local counsel, understanding how the neighbouring legal systems function is and increasingly should be a professional necessity.

Accordingly, continuous legal education offerings should be more intentional in including transnational and comparative components. Training modules, workshops and certification programmes should expose participants not only to legal developments in Singapore, but also to emerging legal reforms and practices in ASEAN as a region and in ASEAN national jurisdictions such as Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia, as well as developments in broader Asia-Pacific contexts. Law societies, bar associations and training institutions should design programmes that expose lawyers to the legal cultures and developments of ASEAN and its eleven member jurisdictions, and indeed beyond. One such example is the NUS Centre for International Law’s (CIL-NUS) training programmes. Now in its seventh year and supported by a Ministry of Law grant, the CIL-NUS flagship ASEAN Law and Policy Academy, which was inaugurated when Singapore assumed the ASEAN Chair in 2018, has trained more than 500 mid- to senior-level policymakers and professionals with law, foreign affairs, and trade and economy portfolios. Designed as a Masters-level intensive course, it compresses 36 classroom hours into five days and covers critical contemporary regional issues such as ASEAN economic integration (including trade and investment), ASEAN external relations, law of the sea, mediation and dispute settlement, climate change, and the digital economy.

Another timely example is CIL-NUS’ 1-day Executive Programme “Diversifying and Maximising ASEAN Opportunities in Trade and Investment Agreements: What Businesses and Law Firms Need to Know for 2025 and Beyond” on 18 February 2025 that was graced by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon and supported by the Ministry of Law. Emphasising practical application and manoeuvrability amid tariff and trade unpredictability, the executive programme translated ASEAN economic treaties into a user-friendly modality for businesses and legal practitioners who advise them to effectively take advantage of the ASEAN Free Trade Area and beyond. Key topics included gaining tariff advantages, improved connectivity and resilient supply chains, regulatory compliance, and troubleshooting and dispute settlement. The programme sought to equip Singapore-based businesses and the legal counsels and consultants who advise them to use ASEAN economic agreements for cost savings, profit maximisation, and business diversification in the ASEAN hinterland. Therefore, transnational and comparative laws are not just an academic curiosity but now need to be part of the Singapore lawyers’ toolbox for a more regionally and globally focused legal practice.

Furthermore, it bears emphasising that learning comparatively must not only involve classroom learning but also outside classroom learning and connections. Initiatives like the ASEAN Law Association (ALA) helmed by Singapore judiciary and the Peer Learning Initiative run by the Centre for Asian Legal Studies (CALS) at NUS Law exemplify how regional collaborations and networks deepen understanding. These platforms provide crucial opportunities for cross-border engagement and exchanges of knowledge. When lawyers and law students share ideas with their peers across jurisdictions, they also build professional connections and trust that will underpin cross-border transactions, dispute resolution and policymaking. Such connections will become the backbone of regional cooperation, contributing to stronger solidarity across the region.

Comparative legal education and ASEAN integration studies are a strategic investment in ASEAN’s and Singapore’s future. They not only complement the ASEAN-focused programmes Singapore universities encourage, but they train current and future lawyers to think beyond borders and to approach difference as an opportunity for learning and dialogue. Such knowledge will also strengthen the rule of law, which is a major factor for the region’s continuing integration. Continuous and holistic comparative legal learning is how ASEAN can build a more connected, confident, and cohesive legal community for the future.