REPORT Results of Participation in the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program
02/12/2025
In accordance with Decision No. 3316/QD-BTP dated November 21, 2025, of the Ministry of Justice on the assignment of civil servants to participate in the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program from November 24, 2025, to November 29, 2025, in Singapore, I, Nguyen Minh Quan, from the International Law Department, have been assigned to participate in this Arbitration Academy Program
REPORT
Results of Participation in the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program
Results of Participation in the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program
In accordance with Decision No. 3316/QD-BTP dated November 21, 2025, of the Ministry of Justice on the assignment of civil servants to participate in the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program from November 24, 2025, to November 29, 2025, in Singapore, I, Nguyen Minh Quan, from the International Law Department, have been assigned to participate in this Arbitration Academy Program. I would like to report on the results of my participation in this Program, specifically as follows:
I. GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE COURSE
The Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program is organized annually by the Centre for International Law (CIL). It is one of the leading international arbitration training programs, featuring lectures and exchanges from several experienced experts in the field of international arbitration and international investment dispute resolution. This program is specifically designed for government officials and lawyers from the private sector, providing knowledge and practical experience on international investment law issues and international investment dispute resolution.
The program included nearly 60 delegates from Asia-Pacific countries (such as Japan, India, Thailand, Brunei, Kenya, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Botswana, Nepal, Togo, Uganda, Ukraine, etc.) and lawyers and arbitrators from law firms, academies, and universities in Singapore. Representing Vietnam were delegates from the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ho Chi Minh City University of Law.
Regarding the training program, which is conducted over 6 days with basic content:
(i) The first 5 days provide and exchange basic knowledge on resolving international investment disputes, including: concepts of international investment law, interpretation of international treaties, regulations on international investment agreements, principles of investment protection, and some rules of international investment arbitration (including the Arbitration Rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, the Arbitration Rules of the ICSID Ancillary Mechanism; ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules).
(ii) The final day is held in the form of a mock arbitration session aimed at training and practicing the knowledge acquired with a specific case. The content of this Trial Simulation fully simulates the arbitration process (from the notification of intent to sue, filing of the lawsuit, defense, submission of documents, participation in the trial) and the participating parties will play the roles of plaintiff, defendant, and legal counsel, having the opportunity to present before an arbitration panel (comprising professors, arbitrators, and experienced lawyers).
II. SPECIFIC CONTENT
The Singapore International Arbitration Academy program focuses on the following:
1. Scope of Application of Investment Agreements
The scope of application of investment agreements is fundamentally based on two elements: firstly, the "investor" being protected and secondly, the "investment" being protected. Therefore, in most international investment disputes to date, one of the issues that has been debated extensively from the outset is the jurisdiction of the arbitration panel, or in other words, whether the investment and the investor in the dispute fall within the scope of the investment agreement.
1.1. Protected “Investments”
Most international investment agreements define “investments” as any type of asset owned or controlled by an investor that is protected. In modern investment agreements, the scope of assets considered “investments” is usually very broad. Typically, agreements define “investments” as “all types of assets” and then provide a list (but an open list) of what can be considered an investment.
1.2. Investor Protection
Even if an asset meets the conditions to be considered an investment under an investment agreement, that investment cannot be protected unless it is owned or controlled by an individual or entity considered an “investor” under the investment agreement. Investors can be divided into two types: natural persons and legal entities.
2. Principles of Investment Protection
To protect foreign investors and their assets from the impact of political risks from the host state, investment agreements often stipulate "treatment" obligations, or in other words, principles of treatment for foreign investors that the host state must ensure.
These principles usually include many different principles, but the most fundamental are: (i) The principle of non-discrimination; (ii) The principle of minimum treatment (including the principle of adequate and safe protection and the principle of fair and equitable treatment); (iii) The principle of non-nationalization; and (iv) Several other principles.
2.1. The Principle of Non-Discrimination and National Treatment
The principle of non-discrimination includes two main principles: national treatment and most-favored-nation treatment. Comparing the treatment of different investors to determine whether discrimination exists should be done on the basis of “similar circumstances.”
The most-favored-nation principle requires the host state to treat investors and investments from partner countries in an investment agreement no less favorably than it would treat investors and investments from a third country under similar conditions. The goal of this principle is to prevent unequal treatment among foreign investors. However, this principle does not require the host state to treat all foreign investors equally. An act can only be considered a violation of this principle if the discrimination is against investors and investments with similar circumstances (related to the investment sector, size, capacity of the investor, etc.).
The principle of national treatment requires a country to treat investors and investments from another country within its territory no less favorably than it would treat its own investors under similar circumstances.
2.2. The principle of minimum treatment
Regarding the two principles of treatment, namely the principle of fair and equitable treatment and the principle of adequate and sufficient protection, investment agreements have two approaches.
(i) The principle of adequate and sufficient protection
The principle of adequate and sufficient protection is stipulated in most investment agreements, from bilateral to multilateral.
This principle requires a member state to fulfill its obligation to provide physical and security protection for investors and investments of other member states within its territory from harmful acts by the government or third parties. This obligation must be fulfilled to no less than the minimum requirements of international law. In other words, the host country must take measures that can be considered reasonable to prevent damage to foreign investment. However, as the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) ruling in the case between Asian Agricultural Production Company and the Government of Sri Lanka stated, this does not mean that the host country must take every measure to ensure the safety of foreign investment.
(ii) The Principle of Fair and Equitable Treatment
The principle of fair and equitable treatment for foreign investors was first introduced in the Havana Charter, adopted at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment held in Havana, Cuba in 1948 (“the Havana Charter of 1948”), and subsequently in the draft Convention on Foreign Investment of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (“OECD”) in 1959, the draft OECD Convention on the Protection of Foreign Assets in 1967, as well as a series of bilateral and multilateral investment agreements signed thereafter.
This is one of the most important principles in international investment law and also the principle most frequently invoked by investors in international investment disputes to date.
Depending on the specific investment agreement, this principle will be stipulated differently. Some agreements stipulate this principle as a separate principle within the investment protection clause. In other investment agreements, this principle is stipulated alongside the principle of adequate and sufficient protection. Some agreements combine this principle with the principle of non-discrimination.
However, most investment agreements do not clearly define the meaning of this principle, and therefore, its application will vary. Due to the very language used in the principle's name, "fairness" and "adequacy" are rather ambiguous terms. This can lead to differences in the interpretation of the principle's meaning. However, essentially, many arbitral tribunals have relied on the following five factors to determine whether a measure by the host country is considered to have violated this principle: (1) failing to protect the legitimate expectations of the investor; (2) failing to implement the measure transparently; (3) acting arbitrarily or discriminatoryly; (4) denying investors access to justice or due process; or(5) Unfair actions. Accordingly, if the host country violates just one of the five elements, it can be considered a violation of this principle.
2.3. The Principle of Non-Nationalization
When conducting international investment activities, foreign investors often worry that the host country will confiscate their assets. Assets of investors located within the territory of the host country mean they will be subject to the laws of that country, which may include provisions on expropriation, nationalization, appropriation of property rights, and regulation of property rights. This uncertainty regarding the guarantee of property rights, if not carefully managed, can become one of the factors causing political risk in international investment relations.
Therefore, most international investment treaties contain provisions on nationalization (the concept of nationalization can be referred to by different names such as requisition (according to the EVIPA Agreement) or expropriation (according to the CPTPP Agreement, the Agreement on Encouragement and Protection of Investment between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the Government of the Republic of India (“Vietnam-India BIT”)).
In its most basic sense, nationalization can be understood as the state's direct or indirect transfer of privately owned assets (of individuals or organizations) into publicly owned assets (of the state) regardless of the will or desire of the original asset owner.
Most investment treaties stipulate that the signatory parties commit not to nationalize the assets or investments of investors from the other signatory party within their territory, except in cases where nationalization meets the conditions stipulated in international treaties. These conditions typically include:
(a) for the public good;
(b) on a non-discriminatory basis;
(c) prompt, adequate, and effective compensation; and
(d) in accordance with due process of law.”
Nationalization includes direct and indirect nationalization. Direct nationalization is the nationalization or expropriation of an investment through formal transfer of ownership or total expropriation. Indirect nationalization is the performance of an action or series of actions that have the effect of direct expropriation without formal transfer of ownership or total expropriation.
2.4. Other Principles
The above protection principles are the most important principles stipulated in investment agreements that investors expect to be guaranteed when making investment decisions in a country and are also often invoked by foreign investors to sue the host country. The government may file a lawsuit with the Government before international arbitration. In addition, international investment law includes other commitments such as commitments regarding money transfers, and commitments not to interfere with the management and business operations of enterprises...
3. Some Rules of International Investment Arbitration
Most investment agreements stipulate that foreign investors can sue the Government before international arbitration under one of the following mechanisms:
(i) Arbitration Rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (hereinafter referred to as “ICSID”);
(ii) Arbitration Rules of the ICSID Auxiliary Mechanism;
(iii) Ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.
This program focuses on introducing the procedural rules of arbitration under the ICSID Arbitration Rules, including the following stages:
a) Request/Notification of Arbitration
The plaintiff submits a written request for dispute resolution by arbitration (“Request”) under the ICSID Convention to the Government. ICSID Secretary.
The Secretary-General conducts a preliminary screening and registers the Request. If the request is rejected (due to the dispute not falling within ICSID's jurisdiction), the process ends at this step.
b) Establishment of the Arbitration Panel
Establishing the number of arbitrators and the method of arbitrator appointment.
Appointing arbitrators.
Establishing the Arbitration Panel.
c) Arbitration Panel adjudicates the case
The Arbitration Panel holds its first meeting with the Parties (CMC).
Conducting submission rounds (regarding the Arbitration Panel's jurisdiction, merits of the claim, and calculation of damages - these may be considered individually or together).
Adjudication session (regarding the Arbitration Panel's jurisdiction, merits of the claim, and calculation of damages - these may be considered individually or together).
During the proceedings in Steps 7 and 8, the Arbitration Panel and the parties may hold one or more additional meetings to Discuss procedural issues related to the lawsuit.
d) Arbitral Award
The arbitral tribunal discusses and issues decisions on jurisdiction, merit, or the final award. If the arbitral tribunal decides it has no jurisdiction over the Plaintiff's claims, the case terminates; if the arbitral tribunal decides it has jurisdiction over the Plaintiff's claims, the proceedings enter the substantive stage, and the proceedings resume from Step 7. If the arbitral tribunal issues a substantive decision stating that the Respondent has breached the investment agreement, the proceedings enter the damage assessment stage and resume from Step 7. Only the final award is considered an award and can be considered in post-award steps as outlined in section 10 below.
e) Post-Award Measures:
(i) Decisions to amend and supplement the arbitral award;
(ii) Annulment of the Arbitral Award;
(iii) Modification of the Arbitral Award;
(iv) Interpretation of the Arbitral Award.
In addition, this section includes a comparison and evaluation between the ICSID Arbitral Rules and other arbitration procedural rules.
4. Other Content
The program dedicated a significant amount of time to group discussions and exchanges among participants on implementing skills related to arbitration proceedings, such as drafting Notices of Claim, drafting Requests for Evidence, and discussing strategies for resolving international investment disputes (from the perspective of the Plaintiff and Defendant).
Furthermore, the entire final day was dedicated to a mock arbitration session aimed at training and practicing the knowledge acquired through the coursework with a specific case. The content of this mock trial fully simulates the arbitration process (from the notification of intent to sue, filing of the lawsuit, defense, submission of documents, participation in the trial) and the participating parties will play the roles of plaintiff, defendant, and legal counsel, having the opportunity to present before an arbitration panel (comprising professors, arbitrators, and experienced lawyers).
III. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Regarding participation in the Program, I seriously and fully participated in all 6 days of the Program, actively participating in the exchange, learning, and discussion of relevant knowledge and actively participating in the mock trial. At the end of the course, I was awarded a Certificate of Completion for the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program 2025.
I found this to be one of the leading international arbitration training programs, with teaching and guidance from some of the world's leading experts in international arbitration and international investment dispute resolution. Participating in the program provided me with many practical benefits in terms of both knowledge and professional skills. Through the systematically presented modules, I had the opportunity to enhance my knowledge base, update my understanding of new topics, and especially, the discussions, exchanges on case studies, and participation in mock trials helped me improve my ability to analyze, process, and apply knowledge of international investment law and international investment dispute resolution to my work.
2. I would like to request that the leaders of the Ministry of Justice and the Department of Personnel and Organization consider and create conditions for officials and civil servants of the Ministry of Justice to continue participating in training programs/courses on international law and international dispute resolution in the future.
The above is a report on the results of my participation in the Singapore International Arbitration Academy Program.