THE ASEAN COMMUNITY: INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS

Summary

“Political tasks will be implemented through law”.

Introduction

As ASEAN moves towards a more integrated Community, it is timely to examine its institutional underpinnings, to understand what changes, if any, may be required to facilitate achievement of that goal.

This discussion focuses on the question of what legal and institutional structures might be needed or useful in the promotion of the ASEAN Community, as envisaged in the Bali Concord II. In particular, it uses the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) as a reference point.

Since the establishment of ASEAN in 1967, a large number of documents have been signed, and arrangements entered into, at various levels by the ASEAN governments, to promote peace, trade, investment, liberalization, co-operation and related goals. At the same time, the Secretariat, which is headed by a Secretary- General and was set up in 1976, has by now become a familiar feature. In 1992, the Secretary-General position was conferred the level of status of a Minister. Apart from the Secretariat, a number of other committees, sub-committees and working groups have also sprung up. In addition, there are specialized bodies which monitor work in the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) (the AFTA Council) and the ASEAN Investment Area (AIA) (the AIA Council). As the integration process deepens in the direction set by the Bali Concord II, it is questionable whether these documents, arrangements and structures suffice. This paper sets out some important process questions which ASEAN needs to ask to see how to deepen the integration process in a concrete fashion.

Level of Integration and Institutional Needs

A preliminary question that arises is what degree of economic integration the Bali Concord II aspires to in ASEAN. As has been pointed out that ASEAN did not at its birth intend for integration. Rather, the vision was one of regional co-operation. This has evidently changed through the years, as the Vision 2020 and Bali Concord II documents show.

Even so, the level of integration can vary. At one end of the spectrum would be a network of states joined through free trade agreement arrangements (such as AFTA). At the other end, one finds more highly integrated arrangements, such as customs and monetary unions; the EU is an obvious instance of such a highly integrated union. The institutional implications would, accordingly, vary depending on the level of integration targeted.