ALSA INTERNATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2022 CASE

ORGANIZED BY

ASIAN LAW STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION ‘ALSA’ INTERNATIONAL

Seoul, South Korea

30th September – 3rd October 2022

IN COLLABORATION WITH

ASIAN INSTITUTE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION ‘AIADR’

1
 List of Documents

1. Claimant’s Notice of Dispute dated 1st July 2021

2. Respondent’s Response to the Claimant’s Notice of Dispute dated 14th July 2021
3. Claimant’s Notice of Arbitration dated 14th January 2022
4. Response to the Notice of Arbitration 14th February 2022
5. AIADR Ad Hoc Arbitration Service Request Form dated 1st March 2022
6. AIADR Letters of Acceptance to Parties 2nd March 2022
7. AIADR Letter of Appointment of Presiding Arbitrator dated 8th March 2022
8. AIADR Letter of Confirmation to Parties 18th March 2022
9. Procedural Order No. 1 dated 15th April 2022
10. Final List of Issues dated 17th April 20
11. Exhibit C1: Executive Order on Protecting Certain Property of ACASIA National
Bank for the Benefit of the People of Acasia
12. Exhibit C2: News of Acasia’s Vegetable Ban
13. Exhibit R1: News of Ban on Rubber Gloves
14. Exhibit R2: Timothy Hashtag

2
 NOTICE OF DISPUTE

JUSTLAW LLP

Advocate & Solicitor

01 July 2021

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of ACASIA, No2 Block B, Level 9

81238 Republic of ACASIA

Office of the Attorney-General,Republic of ACASIA

No 3 Block C, Level 2 81238 Republic of ACASIA

Dear Minister

REQUEST FOR CONCILIATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 30 OF ASEAN

COMPREHENSIVE INVESTMENT AGREEMENT / REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 31 OF ASEAN COMPREHENSIVE INVESTMENT
AGREEMENT

We refer to the above matter, wherein we act for Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd (the Claimant)

1. Our client is a limited liability company incorporated in Malaysia (“Rubber Glove”)

and has over the years strategically acquired and invested huge sums to become
the regional surgical glove maker. Rubber Glove has 15 production lines and

1
 factories in the Republic of Acasia since 2019 that was officiated by The
Honorable Minister ofTrade of the Republic of Acasia.

2. Over the years, our client has contributed machinery and technology expertise to
the investment in Acasia and has operated for two years. Rubber Glove has
employed more than 1000 workers in Acasia and 5000 workers in its Malaysia
factory.

3. Our client is a big time and global agribusiness corporation and has invested in
Acasia for easy access to the raw material, rubber. Our client also invested in the
rubber plantation and manufacturing in Acasia.

4. However, on 1st June 2020, the Republic of Acasia has imposed an add-on tariff of
25% which is higher than the standard rate and tariff rate quota on the Claimant’s
export of their rubber glove products to Democratic Republic of Carado (‘Carado’),
the State where the first known infections of AIS-20 pandemic were discovered, by
introducing amendments to its custom law and regime.

5. On 28th June 2021, the Claimant was informed by the Acasia National Bank that
their operating bank account has been frozen due to the reason of “national
security” without any substantive evidence regarding the Claimant’s wrongdoing
[Claimant Exhibit C2].

6. We believe that Acasia has undermined the objectives and breached the obligations
under the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA) specifically on
Article 3, Article 5, Article 6 and Article 14 of the ACIA.

7. We request Acasia to consider withdrawing the aforementioned tariff which we

believe has hampered and/or restricted the Claimant’s supply of surgical rubber
gloves to the regional market and Carado. Our product could not be feasible to sell
in the local market as the local consumptionis unable to take up the surplus.

2
 8. This imposition of the new tariff as a calculated trade retaliation to the recent
Carado’s ban on the importation of Acasia supply of vegetables, as reported by the
local and foreign media, has adversely affected our client investment in Acasia. The
supply of surgical rubber gloves is for the health industries and hospitals to fight
the worldwide pandemic. As such, this would not be reasonable to stop the
Claimant’s continuous supply to Carado and the region.

9. On 14th June 2021, the Claimant’s appeal to the Acasia custom department has
been rejected and the Court in Acasia has agreed withthe local authority that the
custom imposition of the new tariff was within their jurisdiction. The Claimant has
appealed to the higher courts in Acasia but no hearing date for the appeal has been
fixed.

10. The Claimant’s investment has suffered severe loss and damages and many
Acasian people may lose their job in the event the factory is to close.

11. We also urge you to unfreeze the Claimant’s operating bank account forthe reason
stated has no basis.

12. In that regard, the Claimant would like to request Acasia’s agreement to have a
conciliation and/or consultation to achieve a win-win scenario forall parties.

13. Further we propose that the above dispute be referred to arbitration under Article
33 (1) (e) of the ACIA and to appoint Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (AIADR) by adopting the AIADR AD HOCARBITRATION RULES ON
APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
(the “AIADR Rules”)

For the Claimant

Wei Yan

JUSTLAW LLP, Ms. Wei Yan

3
 RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF DISPUTE

14 July 2021

JUSTLAW LLP

No 3, Guran City, ASEAN Road, ASEAN Business Park

Democratic Republic of Carado

Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd28 Boulevard Road

Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd

No 2 Acasia Central Industrial ParkIndustrial Road

Republic of Acasia 82000

Dear Sir/Madam

REQUEST FOR CONCILIATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 30 OF ASEAN

COMPREHENSIVE INVESTMENT AGREEMENT / REQUEST FOR
CONSULTATIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 31 OF ASEAN COMPREHENSIVE
INVESTMENT AGREEMENT

This is in reply to the Notice of Dispute dated 1 July 2021.

4
1. The assertions made in the above notices is baseless and without merit. The
amendments to the custom tariff and quota, are a legitimate exercise of the
Respondent’s regulatory powers and form part of a comprehensive government
policy.

2. The Respondent has acted in a fair and equitable manner and has not been
unfair to any foreign investment.

3. The Respondent has always urged the corporation to practice Sustainable

Development Goals in the promotion of Decent Work and Economic Growth
in line with the 17 Goals adopted by United Nations Member States in 2015
as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This is part of the guiding
policy adopted by Acasia.

4. Further, the Respondent has been made aware that Rubber Glove products are
made using forced labor and exploitation of vulnerable workers. The monies kept
at the Acasia National Bank were the workers ‘deposit’ paid to secure their job and
will only be refunded when they completed their contract. The Respondent
finds this untenable.

5. The Respondent is concerned about the treatment of the people working atthe
Claimant’s foreign factory and locally. There have been reports in the media
that many were forced to pay high fees to recruitment agents to secure their
jobs, leaving them vulnerable to debt bondage. Workers have alleged they are put
to work for 12-hour shifts six days a week – with some earning as little as USD10
a day – and live in small dormitories shared by more than 20 workers. Their
passport has been held and the bank deposits were both used as collateral to
avoid the workers from ‘running away’. This is akin to modern slavery.

6. Further, the local workers are paid less than the minimum wage imposed in
Malaysia, which prioritizes profits and production efficiency over the welfare
and basic rights of its workers.
5
 7. The objections outlined above are not intended to be exhaustive, and the
Respondent reserves its right to raise any further contentions in the future
and defend rights when the need arises.

8. The Respondent further agree to refer to arbitration under Article 33 (1) (e)
of the ACIA and to appoint Asia Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
(AIADR) by adopting the AIADR AD HOC ARBITRATION RULES ON
APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
(the “AIADR Rules”)

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (GOVERNMENT OF ACASIA)

6
 NOTICE OF ARBITRATION

JUSTLAW LLP

Advocate & Solicitor

14 January 2022

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of ACASIA No 2 Block B, Level 9

81238 Republic of ACASIA

Office of the Attorney-General, Republic of ACASIA

No 3 Block C, Level 2

81238 Republic of ACASIA

Dear Minister

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER THE AIADR AD HOC ARBITRATION

RULES ON APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT BETWEEN RUBBER GLOVE SDN BHD (Claimant) AND THE
REPUBLIC OF ACASIA (Respondent) - NOTICE OF ARBITRATION

Pursuant to Article 31 of the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA),

our client Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd (a Malaysian incorporated limited liability company)
has tried to resolve the dispute through consultation and negotiation but you as the
disputing parties have rejected the same.

As such, our client is invoking Article 32 ACIA, i.e., claim by an Investor of a Member
State that “If an investment dispute has not been resolved within 180 days of the receipt

7
by a disputing Member State of a request for consultations, the disputing investor
may, subject to this Section, submit to arbitration a claim”.

Further to Article 33 ACIA on Submission of a Claim, our client is a disputing investor

and you have jointly agreed (with your written consent) for the Asian Institute of
Alternative Dispute Resolution (AIADR) to be the appointing authority pursuant to
the Ad Hoc Arbitration Rules. On Appointment, Case Administration and Financial
Management to appoint the arbitrator.

We hereby submit our Notice of Arbitration and the details are as follows;

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd, a company incorporated under the laws of Malaysia (the
“Claimant”), hereby serves this Notice of Arbitration (the “Notice”) on the
Republic of Acasia (the “Respondent”) in accordance with AIADR AD HOC
ARBITRATION RULES ON APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION AND
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (the “AIADR Rules”) and Article 33 (1) (e) of the
ASEAN COMPREHENSIVE INVESTMENT AGREEMENT, which was signed
and entered into force on The ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement
(ACIA) came into effect on 29 March 2012 to support a free, open, transparent
and integrated investment regime in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) region in line with the goal of achieving an ASEAN Economic
Community by 2015 (the ‘ACIA’).

2. This Notice concerns a dispute (the “Dispute”) between the Claimant and
Respondent, arising under the ACIA. The Claimant seeks pecuniary compensation
arising out of breaches by Respondent, of the ACIA, in connection with the
Claimant’s investment in Respondent.

II. OVERVIEW OF THE DISPUTE

3. The Claimant, through Rubber Duck Holdings Limited (“Rubber Duck”), a

limited liability company majority owned by the foreign investor (Wholly Foreign
8
 Owned Enterprise / WOFE) incorporated in Shaoyo, Carado acquired the
majority shareholding of Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd, a limited liability company
incorporated in Malaysia (“Rubber Glove”). The Claimant strategically acquired
and invested huge sums to become the regional surgical glove maker having 15
production lines and factories in Respondent.

4. The Claimant has vided its parent company contributed machinery and
technology expertise to the investment in Respondent and has operated smoothly
for two years.

5. In summary, the Dispute concerns actions of Respondent in unlawfully

imposing an add-on tariff of 25% higher than usual and tariff rate quota on
the Claimant’s export of its rubber glove products to Carado by introducing
amendments to its custom law and regime.

6. The Respondent has undermined the objectives of the ACIA and breached the
obligations under Article 3, Article 5 and Article 6 ofthe ACIA.

7. The Claimant hereby demands, pursuant to Rule 1 of the AIADR Rules and Article
3 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules that the Dispute that has arisen between
the Claimant and the Respondent be referred to arbitration under Article 33
(1) (e) of the ACIA.

8. Following this introduction, this Notice is made up of the following sections:

a. Section A describes the parties to the Dispute;

b. Section B sets out the applicable jurisdictional requirements under the
AIADR Rules and the ACIA, which are satisfied bythe Claimant;
c. Section C sets out a brief overview of the factual background to the
Dispute;
d. Section D sets out Respondent breaches of the ACIA;

9
 e. Section E explains the basis for the Claimant's current reference to
arbitration;
f. Section F addresses the constitution of the Tribunal;
g. Section G proposes a seat of arbitration;
h. Section H addresses the relief sought by the Claimant.

SECTION A: THE PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE

9. The Claimant is a company incorporated under the laws of Malaysia and has its
Malaysia office at 28 Boulevard Road, Kuala Lampur, Malaysia and with a 30 acres
factory at No 2 Acasia Central Industrial Park, Industrial Road, Republic of Acasia
82000. The majority shareholder is Rubber Duck Holdings Ltd and 1% is owned
by Mr. Tom from the Republic of Acasia.

10. The Claimant is represented in these proceedings by its legal counsel, JUSTLAW
LLP. The correspondence in relation to this arbitration should be sent to:

No 3, Guran City, ASEAN Road, ASEAN Business Park

Democratic Republic of Carado

11. The Respondent in these proceedings is the Government of Acasia. To the best
of the Claimant's knowledge, communications on this matter with the
Government of Acasia should be sent to the following address:

Office of the Attorney-General, Republic of ACASIA

No 3 Block C, Level 2
81238 Republic of ACASIA

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of ACASIA No 2 Block B, Level 9
81238 Republic of ACASIA

10
SECTION B: JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE AIADR AD
HOC ARBITRATION RULES ONAPPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION
AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ASEAN COMPREHENSIVE
INVESTMENT AGREEMENT

Administration by AIADR

1 2 . Pursuant to Article 33 (1) (e) ACIA, the Parties have agreed to refer
their disputes to arbitration in accordance with the AIADR AD HOC
ARBITRATION RULES ON APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION AND
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT. Accordingly, this arbitration shall be conducted
pursuant to and administered by the AIADR in accordance with the
UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.

Qualifying Investor

13. The Claimant is an “investor” in accordance to Article 4 of the ACIA which means
a natural person of a Member State or a juridical person of a Member State that
is making, or has made aninvestment in the territory of any other Member
State. The Claimant was incorporated under the laws of Malaysia and has a
registered office in Malaysia, as a private limited company. The Claimant thus
qualifies as an "investor" within the meaning of Article 4 of ACIA.

Qualifying Investments

14. The Claimant has made investments in the territory of the Respondent for the
purposes of Articles 4 of the ACIA.

15. Article 4 of ACIA provides the definition of what constitutes an investment

protected under the ACIA:
c. “investment” means every kind of asset, owned or controlled, by an
investor, including but not limited to the following:

11
 i. movable and immovable property and other property rights such
as mortgages, liens or pledges;
ii. shares, stocks, bonds and debentures and any other forms of
participation in a juridical person and rights or interest derived
therefrom;
iii. intellectual property rights which are conferred pursuant to the
laws and regulations of each Member State;
iv. claims to money or to any contractual performance related to a
business and having financial value;
v. rights under contracts, including turnkey, construction,
management, production or revenue-sharing contracts; and
business concessions required to conduct economic activities and
having financial value conferred by law or under a contract,
including any concessions to search, cultivate, extract or exploit
natural resources.
d. The term “investment” also includes amounts yielded by investments,
in particular, profits, interest, capital gains, dividends, royalties and fees.
Any alteration of the form in which assets are invested or reinvested shall
not affect their classification as investment;

16. Pursuant to Article 2 of the ACIA, this Agreement shall apply to existing
investments at the date of entry into force of this Agreement as well as to
investments madeafter the entry into force of this Agreement.

17. The Claimant has acquired assets in Acasia in accordance with its national laws. In
particular, the setting up the manufacturing surgical rubber gloves plant by
the Claimant, qualify as "investment" under the ACIA.

12
SECTION C : FACTUAL BACKGROUND TO THE DISPUTE

Background to Claimant’s Investment

18. The Claimant’s investment in Respondent was established in 2020 and has since
grown to 15 glove production lines into the world’s largest manufacturer of gloves,
holding 16% of the world market share for rubber gloves and mainly selling
to every ASEAN member with operations in Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam,
Carado and Acasia, which is a new member of ASEAN.

19. The Claimant has invested in the Respondent due to the logistic advantage in the
region and competitive supply of labor power. The Claimant also relied on the
ASEAN trade agreements which intended to shore up the sustainability of ASEAN
towards its economic integration agenda under the ASEAN Economic
Community (AEC) in 2015 and beyond.

Introduction of Acasia’s new Tariff and Quota to Carado

20. On 1 January 2022, the Government of Acasia unlawfully imposed an add-on tariff
of 25% higher than usual and tariff rate quota on the Claimant export of its rubber
glove products to Carado by introducing amendments to its custom law and
regime. These measures have been implemented to effectively block and/or limit
the exports of surgical rubber glove to Carado to assure domestic supplies. The
Claimant’s business has been adversely affected by 61% due to theimposition of
the tariff.

21. The introduction of the new Tariff and Quota has unlawfully affected the
Claimant’s business to Carado:
a. that of 25% hike in tariff is a reasonable requirement form to stop
and/or to limit the Claimant to export to Carado;
b. the quota imposed to export to Carado has forced the Claimant unable
to complete the contracts of supply which were entered by the Claimant;

13
 c. the Respondent only targeted Claimant’s product to Carado as retaliation
or business spat due to Respondent’s media publicity around supply issues
linked to the pandemic, AIS-20. Carado a has then limited and/or banned
the import of the vegetable from the farms in Respondent. They have
lost their license or were affected by this due to technical reasons like poor
paperwork or very, very minor details that probably do havea political
bias towards that in terms of Respondent's relations with Carado.
d. the shortage of global supply of rubber surgical gloves has helped a surge in
the prices across international market and Carado amid the continuous
battle with the worldwide pandemic;
e. the Claimant has challenged the new Tariff and Quota in the national court
of the Respondent and has been rejected on the first hearing. It is now
on appeal.
f. The Claimant was notified by the Acasia National Bank that their bank
account was frozen. The Claimant object to this.
g. Acasia has undermined the objectives of the ACIA and breached the
obligations under including but not limited to Article 3, Article 5, Article
6 and Article 14 of the ACIA.

SECTION D: ACASIA BREACHES OF THE ACIA

22. The following actions of the Government of Acasia constitute breaches of the
ACIA, which form the basis of the Claimant’s claim against the Government of
Acasia:
a. introducing new tariff and quota after the investment was made by the
Claimant;
b. directly and/or indirectly stop and/or limit Claimant to export the
product to Carado as it is no longer viable in the business sense to do
so;
23. These measures have had the effect of destroying the Claimant’s business in
respect of the Claimant’s investment in the Respondent. The Respondent has
violated (including but not limited) Articles 1 ACIA; -

14
 The objective of this Agreement is to create a free and open investment regime in
ASEAN in order to achieve the end goal of economic integration under the AEC in
accordance with the AEC Blueprint, through the following:
a. progressive liberalization of the investment regimes of Member States;
b. provision of enhanced protection to investors of all Member States and
their investments;
c. improvement of transparency and predictability of investment rules,
regulations and procedures conducive to increased investment among
Member States;
d. joint promotion of the region as an integrated investment area; and
cooperation to create favorable conditions for investment by investors
of a Member State in the territory of the other Member States.

SECTION E: REFERENCE TO ARBITRATION

24. Pursuant to Section B of ACIA, Article 29 and 32 of ACIA, the Claimant is

submitting to arbitration-
a. that the disputing Member State has breached an obligation arising
under Articles 5 (National Treatment),6 (Most-Favoured-Nation
Treatment), 8 (Senior Management and Board of Directors), 11
(Treatment of Investment), 12 (Compensation in Cases of Strife), 13
(Transfers) and 14 (Expropriation and Compensation) relating to the
management, conduct, operation or sale or other disposition of a
covered investment; and
b. that the disputing investor in relation to its covered investment has
incurred loss or damage by reason of or arising out of that breach.

25. On 01/07/2021, the Claimant issued a Notice of Dispute to the Government of

Acasia, notifying it of the Claimant’s intention to commence conciliation and/or
consultation pursuant to article 31 and 32 of ACIA.

26. The Respondent on vide its response dated 14/07/2021 blatantly dismissed the
Claimant’s claims, leaving no possibility for any negotiation to settle the dispute.

15
 27. Accordingly, the Claimant now issues this Notice pursuant to Rule 3 of the
UNCITRRAL Rules, to commence an arbitration underArticle 33(e) ACIA.

SECTION F: CONSTITUTION OF THE TRIBUNAL

28. Pursuant to Article 33(5)(b) of the ACIA, the Claimant has given its’ written
consent for AIADR as the appointing authority to appoint that arbitrator.

29. The Claimant propose to appoint Professor Chung, a Singaporean national, law
professor who is an expert in international trade and investment rules pursuant
to Article 35 of ACIA.

SECTION G: SEAT OF ARBITRATION

30. The parties have not agreed upon a seat of the arbitration. However, the
Claimant invites the Respondent to agree to Kuala Lampur, Malaysia as the seat
of arbitration. The Claimant recognizes that absent any agreement as to the
seat of arbitration, it is for the Tribunal to determine the seat of the
arbitration.

31. The Claimant propose the hearing venue be in Guran City, Carado.

SECTION H: RELIEF SOUGHT

32. On the basis of the foregoing, without limitation and fully reserving its right
to supplement this request, the Claimant requests the following relief-
a. that the Respondent has breached an obligation arisingunder Articles 5
(National Treatment), 6 (Most-Favoured- Nation Treatment), 11
(Treatment of Investment) and 14 (Expropriation and Compensation)
relating to the management, conduct, operation or sale or other
disposition of a covered investment; and
b. that the Claimant in relation to its covered investment has incurred loss or
damage by reason of or arising out of that breach

16
 c. An award of damages in respect of all loss caused as a result of
Respondent breaches of the ACIA, in an amount tobe quantified by the
Tribunal, together with pre-and post- award interest on any sums so
awarded (at a rate to be determined by the Tribunal);
d. Respondent to pay Claimant all appropriate costs of these arbitration
proceedings, including the fees and expenses of the Tribunal and costs
of legal representation and interest thereof
e. Such other and further relief as the Tribunal considers appropriate, in the
circumstances.
f. The Claimant reserves the right to supplement or amend the relief sought
in future submissions.

Submitted for and on behalf of the Claimant

Dated 14/01/2022

Signed

Wei Yan

JUSTLAW LLP, Ms. Wei Yan

Guran Province, Democratic Republic of Carado

17
 RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF ARBITRATION
14 February 2022

JUSTLAW LLP

No 3, Guran City, ASEAN Road,ASEAN Business Park, Democratic Republic of Carado

Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd

28 Boulevard Road, Kuala Lampur, Malaysia

Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd

No 2 Acasia Central Industrial ParkIndustrial Road

Republic of Acasia 82000

Dear Sir/ Madam

RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF ARBITRATION

Submitted for and on behalf of the Respondent by Mr. Ali from Messrs Ali &
Associates from Annexed Building, No 8 Surewin Drive, Acasia.

The Respondent authorized representative -

The Attorney-General (Republic of Acasia)

Office of the Attorney-General, Republic of ACASIA

No 3 Block C, Level 2, 81238 Republic of ACASIA

The response to the notice of arbitration is as follows; -

18
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION & FACTUAL BACKGROUND

1. The Republic of Acasia (the “Respondent”) submits this Response to the Notice of
Arbitration (the “Response”) received from the Claimant, Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd a
company incorporated in Malaysia pursuant to Rule 4 ofthe UNCITRAL Rules.

2. The Claimant challenge the legitimate right of the Respondent in amending the
custom tariff and quota in respect of exportation of rubber gloves product to
Carado. The Claimant has alleged that Acasia has undermined the objectives of the
ACIA and breached the obligations under including but not limited to Article 3,
Article 5 and Article 6 of the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement
(ACIA).

3. Both parties agree to refer the dispute to arbitration under Article 33 (1) (e) of the
ACIA and to appoint Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution(AIADR) by
adopting the AIADR AD HOC ARBITRATION RULES ON APPOINMENT, CASE
ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (the “AIADR Rules”)

4. The amendments to the custom law are a legitimate exercise of Acasia’s regulatory
powers to protect policy, interest and wellbeing of its citizens, and form part of a
comprehensive government policy to make urged the private corporation to
practice Sustainable Development Goals in promotion of Decent Work and
Economic Growth in line with the 17 Goals adopted by United Nation Member
States in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable.

5. The Claimant has mounted a challenge in Acasia’s Court and has been rejected.
Their appeal to the Acasia custom authority has been consideredand rejected. As
such, the Claimant baseless claim will inevitably fail, bothas to jurisdiction and the
merits. The Respondent have issued a Responseto the Notice of Dispute issued by
the Claimant.

19
SECTION 2: JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES AND THE REPONDENT’S
APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 36 ACIA

6. The Claimant seeks to argue that the Tribunal has jurisdiction under the ACIA but
the Respondent objecting on the following grounds:
a. The Claimant majority shareholder is Rubber Duck Holdings Ltd (a
company incorporated in Carado) and 1% owned by Mr. Tom from the
Republic of Acasia and do not qualify as an Investor under ACIA.
b. The Claimant’s ‘Agribusiness’ do not fall under any of the sectorprovided
for in Article 3(3) ACIA and neither qualified as an Investmentunder ACIA.
c. The parties did not complete the consultations process as required under
ACIA as it is a requisite to have 180 days of ‘cooling off’ period pursuant to
Article 32 ACIA.

7. The Respondent seeks immediate dismissal of Claimant’s claims and reserves its
rights to develop and formulate objections.

SECTION 3: RESPONSE TO RUBBER GLOVE’S CLAIMS

8. Further and without prejudice to the Dismissal Application, Acasia rejects the
Rubber Gloves’ claim that it has breached its obligation under the ACIAto accord fair
and equitable treatment to our investor. Their purported claimis baseless and on a
witch hunt whereas the claim for modern slavery is very real indeed as the
Claimant’s export to United States has been restricted by the US Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) agency since 1/6/2021 as reported by the international
media.

9. The amendments to the custom tariff were made following the implementation
Sustainable Development Goals in promotion of Decent Work and Economic
Growth in line with the 17 Goals adopted by United Nation Member States in 2015
as part of the 2030 Agenda for SustainableDevelopment. This is part of the guiding
policy adopted by the Government of Acasia.

20
10. The income generated from the tariff will be used to improve the working condition
and health of the worker. It is also Acasia’s commitment to battle modern slavery
be it at home or abroad. Acasia is committed to the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) which was proclaimed by the United Nations General
Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a
common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. All Acasian
working in Malaysia for the Claimant shall be accorded with human rights
protection. These are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex,
nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights include
the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture,freedom of opinion
and expression, the right to work and education, and many more. Everyone is
entitled to these rights, without discrimination. The Acasian working for the
Claimant in Acasia should be accorded the same minimum wage imposed by the
authority in Malaysia. The monies kept at the Acasia National Bank were the
workers ‘deposit’ paid to secure their job and will only be refunded when they
completed their contract. This is the people’s money and not an investment.

11. Acasia rejects Rubber Glove’s claim that it has breached the obligation to ensure
that purported investments of Rubber Glove enjoy full protection andsecurity under
the ACIA.

12. Further, the Claimant is still able to trade their products freely in Acasia andthis
policy will also ensure ample supply of lower priced necessary productto fight the
pandemic and are non-discriminatory as it is applicable to all manufacturer in
Acasia as well to achieve the most fundamental public welfare objective – the
protection of public health at a cheaper and accessible price. This also ensures
ample supply of surgical rubber glovesto Acasia and ASEAN.

21
SECTION 4: TRIBUNAL CONSTITUITION

13. Pursuant to Article 33(5)(b) of the ACIA, the Respondent have given its’ written
consent for AIADR as the appointing authority to appoint thatarbitrator and the
Respondent proposed Thomas Bung, QC, a Brunei national, who is an expert
in international trade pursuant to Article 35 of ACIA.

14. The Respondent agree that the seat to be in Kuala Lampur, Malaysia. The
Respondent further agree to have the venue hearing at Guan Province,Carado as it
would be convenient for the parties logistically.

SECTION 5: RESPONSE TO RELIEF SOUGHT

15. As follows from the Response as set out above, the Tribunal should reject the relief
sought by the Claimant. Acasia respectfully requests the Tribunal:
a. to declare that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over Claimant’s relief sought;
b. alternatively, to dismiss Claimant’s claims in their entirety;
c. to order that Claimant to bear the costs of the arbitration, includingAcasia
costs of legal representation and assistance;
d. any other relief as appropriate in these proceedings.

Submitted for and on behalf of The Government of the Republic of Acasia

Ali

Mr. Ali
Messrs Ali & AssociatesAnnexed Building,
No 8 Surewin Drive, Acasia.

22
 AIADR Ad Hoc Arbitration Services Request Form

1. Particulars of the Requesting Party

a. Name of Individual or Authorized Representative(s) (as in Identity Card /
Passport):
Eric Song Shi Jie
b. Name of Company and Registration Number (if relevant):
Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd
c. Full Correspondence Address
28 Boulevard Road, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and factory at No 2 Acasia
Central Industrial Park, Industrial Road, Republic of Acasia 82000
d. Contact Number and Fax Number
+8618221605800
e. Email Address
eric.song@yahoo.com

2. Particulars of the Requesting Party's Legal Representative, if any

a. Name of Firm
Justlaw LLP
b. Name of Counsel in Charge (as in Identity Card / Passport):
Ms. Wei Yan
c. Full Correspondence Address
No 3, Guran City ASEAN Road, ASEAN Business Park, Democratic
Republic of Carado
d. Contact Number and Fax Number
Tel. No:+0086 842922600 Fax No.: +0086 842922608
e. Email Address
weiyan@justlaw.com.cdo

23
3. Particulars of the Other Party
a. Name of Individual or Authorized Representative(s) (as in Identity Card /
Passport):
Hemasankarry Kumar
b. Name of Company and Registration Number (if relevant)
Government of the Republic of Acasia
c. Full Correspondence Address
the Office of the Attorney-General, Republic of ACASIA, No 3 Block C,
Level 2, 81238 Republic of ACASIA.
d. Contact Number and Fax Number
+6012- 4567984
e. Email Address
hema@gmail.com

4. Particulars of the Other Party’s Legal Representative, if any

a. Name of Firm
Messrs. Ali & Associates
b. Name of Counsel in Charge (as in Identity Card / Passport):
Mr. Ali
c. Full Correspondence Address
Annexed Building, No 8 Surewin Drive, Acasia.
d. Contact Number and Fax Number
Tel. No: +0013 3528254 Fax No.:+0003 78421608
e. Email Address
ali@aliandassociates.com
5. Brief Description and Nature of Dispute
The Dispute concerns actions of Respondent in unlawfully imposing add on tariff
of 25% higher than usual and tariff rate quota on the Claimant export of its rubber
glove products to Carado by introducing amendments to its custom law and
regime. Further to that, the dispute also concerns the issue of if Acasia National
Bank freezing Claimant's operating bank account is in breach of ACIA.

24
6. Amount in Dispute
USD 10,000,000.00
7. Status of ongoing legal or dispute resolution proceedings (if relevant)
 Adjudication
 Litigation
 Mediation
 Negotiation
 Others, please specify

Date of Commencement –

Brief Description

Proceeding Reference

Leave to Arbitrate

Agreement for Arbitration – Mediation – Arbitration, if any:

8. Arbitration Agreement / Clause

 The parties have agreed to refer/submit their dispute to arbitration
administered by AIADR (attach a copy of agreement or any relevant instrument).
 The parties have agreed that AIADR shall be the appointing authority for the
arbitration (attach a copy of agreement or any relevant instrument).

9. Notice of Arbitration
Date Issued: 20/01/2022
 a copy of notice of arbitration issued with attachments
 proof of delivery to other Party or Parties
 response from other Party or Parties (if any)

25
10. Conduct of Arbitration
Language Agreed: English
Proposed Language for Agreement English
Venue Agreed Guran City, Carado
Seat of Arbitration Kuala Lampur, Malaysia
Governing Law
Applicable Arbitral Rules AD HOC ARBITRATIO RULES ON
APPOINTMENT, CASE
ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT (‘AIADR’ RULES)
11. List of Services under Request
 (A) Appointment of Arbitrator
 (B) Determination of Number of Arbitrator
 (C) Challenge of Arbitrator
 (D) Any other services

(A) Appointment of Arbitrator

 parties agree to jointly nominate [name of arbitrator(s) Professor Chung,
Thom as Bung, QC and CV, attached to this Form] as arbitrator(s), for
confirmation of AIADR
 The parties are unable to jointly agree on nomination of arbitrator(s) and further
agree that the AIADR shall appoint arbitrator(s). Preferred qualification and
attributes of arbitrator(s)
Nationality
Profession
Language
Industry

(B) Determination of Number of Arbitrator

 The parties agree to appoint one arbitrator for the arbitration
 The parties agree to appoint one arbitrator for the arbitration

26
  The parties are unable to jointly agree on the number of arbitrators. Please
specify reasons in the column below:

(C) Challenge of Arbitrator

 The parties agree that the challenge of arbitrator shall be decided by AIADR
under the AIADR Ad Hoc Arbitration Rules on Appointment, Case Administration
and Financial Management (attach a copy of agreement or any relevant
instrument);
 The parties agree that the challenge of arbitrator shall be decided by AIADR on
procedures as agreed by parties (attach a copy of agreement or any relevant
instrument).

(D) Any other services, please specify

12. Proof of Payment of Non-Refundable Registration Fee

 Yes. A copy of the receipt attached

13. Currency Applicable

 Malaysian Ringgit (MYR)
 US Dollar (USD)
 Caradonese Currency (CDC)
I declare that all the information filled in this form are true to the best of my knowledge.

Full Name(s) : …… Eric Song Shi Jie…………………….

NRIC/Passport: ……………………………………………………
Signature: …..ERIC……………………………………….
Date: …….1/3/2022……………………………….
Company Stamp (if any)

27
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
No.28-1, Jalan Medan Setia 2 Bukit Damansara 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
T: +603 2096 2228 E: thesecretariat@aiadr.world
2 March 2022

JUSTLAW LLP

Counsel for the Claimant BY EMAIL

No 3, Guangxi ASEAN Road, (weiyan@justlaw.com.cn)

ASEAN Business Park, Carado

Attn: Ms. Wei Yan

MESSRS ALI & ASSOCIATES

Counsel for the Respondent BY EMAIL

Annexed Building, No 8 Surewin Drive (ali@aliandassociates.com))

Acasia.

Attn: Mr. Ali

Dear Sirs,

Case No.: AIADR/A3123

Claimant: Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd

Respondent: The Government of The Republic of Acasia

Re: Dispute pursuant to ASEAN Comprehensive InvestmentAgreement (ACIA)

We write with reference to the above matter and acknowledge receipt of the AIADR Ad
Hoc Arbitration Services Request Form dated 1 March 2022 together with the supporting
documents from the Claimant’s counsel on 1 March 2022.

28
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
No.28-1, Jalan Medan Setia 2 Bukit Damansara 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
T: +603 2096 2228 E: thesecretariat@aiadr.world
1. We note that the Claimant has submitted the request for appointment of arbitrator
under the AIADR Ad Hoc Arbitration Rules on Appointment, Case Administration
& Financial Management pursuant to Article 33(1)(e) of the ASEAN
Comprehensive Investment Agreement (“ACIA”) which provides that:
“A disputing investor may submit a claim referred to in Article 32 (Claim by
an Investor of a Member State) at the choice of the disputing investor to the
Regional Centre for Arbitration at Kuala Lumpur or any other regional
centre forarbitration in ASEAN”
2. Pursuant to Article 35 of the ACIA, the arbitral tribunal shall comprise of three
arbitrators. We note that the Claimant has nominated Professor Chung Yeow Choy
asthe first Arbitrator and Respondent has nominated Thomas Bung, QC as the
second arbitrator.
3. In accordance with Rule 10, we invite the Claimant to pay AIADR’s AppointmentFee
for appointment of presiding arbitrator of the three-arbitrator tribunal in the
amountof USD1,250.00 by 9 March 2022.
4. The case reference number assigned for this matter is “AIADR/A3123”. For
purpose of communication, we request the parties to communicate with AIADR by
email only in these proceedings by sending to both arbitration@aiadr.world and
the case counsel in charge, Ms. Rammit Kaur (rammit@aiadr.world) in all email
correspondence with AIADR on this matter.

Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned should you have any queries.Thank you.

Yours Faithfully

Rammit Kaur (Ms.)

Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution

Email address: rammit@aiadr.world

Tel +(603) 2300 6032

Fax No.: +(603) 2300 6032

29
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
No.28-1, Jalan Medan Setia 2 Bukit Damansara 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
T: +603 2096 2228 E: thesecretariat@aiadr.world
8 March 2022

MS. SAITHONG CONFIDENTIAL

By email only: saithong@alsa.tribunal.com

Dear Sir,

Case No.: AIADR/A3123

Claimant: Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd

Respondent: The Government of The Republic of Acasia

Re: Dispute pursuant to ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA)

1. We refer to the above arbitration matter which is presently being administered by

AIADR under the AIADR Ad Hoc Rules on Appointment Case Administration &
Financial Management.
2. Pursuant to Rule 5 of the AIADR Ad Hoc Rules on Appointment Case
Administration & Financial Management, we are pleased to inform you that you
have been chosen for appointment as the presiding arbitrator of the three-
arbitrator tribunal.
3. Please find enclosed the description of facts of the case and information relating
to your prospective appointment. If you are able to accept the proposed
appointment, please signify your acceptance by signing and returning the Letter
of Acceptance together with the Declaration Form.
4. For reference, please find enclosed the AIADR Code of Conduct for Arbitrators.
5. We look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you.
Yours Faithfully

Rammit Kaur (Ms.)

Case Counsel
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution

30
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
No.28-1, Jalan Medan Setia 2 Bukit Damansara 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
T: +603 2096 2228 E: thesecretariat@aiadr.world
Email address: rammit@aiadr.world
Tel +(603) 2300 6032
Fax No.: +(603) 2300 6032 Encls.

18 March 2022

JUSTLAW LLP BY EMAIL

Counsel for the Claimant (weiyan@justlaw.com.cn)
No 3, Guangxi ASEAN Road,
ASEAN Business Park, Democratic Republic of Corado

Attn: Ms. Wei Yan

MESSRS. ALI & ASSOCIATES BY EMAIL
Counsel for the Respondent (ali@aliandassociates.com),
No 8 Annexed Building, Surewin Drive,Acasia.

Attn: Mr. Ali

PROF. CHUNG YEOW CHOY BY EMAIL
13, Jalan Melawati 3, (chung.hew@gmail.com)
46000, Kuala Lumpur,Malaysia.

THOMAS BUNG, QC BY EMAIL

10, Downing Street, ( (thomas@yahoo.com.uk)
SW1A London, United Kingdom.

MS. SAITHONG BY EMAIL

102-304 Sajik-ro-3-gil 23, (saithong@alsa.tribunal.com)
Seoul 30174, South Korea.

31
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
No.28-1, Jalan Medan Setia 2 Bukit Damansara 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
T: +603 2096 2228 E: thesecretariat@aiadr.world
Dear Sirs,
Case No.: AIADR/A3123

Claimant: Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd

Respondent: The Government of The Republic of Acasia

Re: Dispute pursuant to ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA)

____________________________________________________________

We refer to the above matter and our letter dated 2 March 2022. We acknowledge receipt
of the Claimant’s counsel’s email dated 6 March 2022, which was copied tothe other side

1. Pursuant to Rule 5 of the AIADR Ad Hoc Arbitration Rules on Appointment, Case

Administration & Financial Management, AIADR hereby confirm that Ms.
Saithong as the third and presiding arbitrator in this arbitration.
2. With the arbitral tribunal now constituted, we wish to bring to your attention Rule
11(1) and Rule 11(2) of the AIADR Ad Hoc Arbitration Rules on Appointment,
Case Administration & Financial Management, which states that AIADR shall fix
a provisional advance deposit towards the arbitrator’s fees, estimated expenses,
and the fee for other services rendered. The amount of this deposit shall be paid in
equal shares by both Parties immediately upon request from the AIADR after the
appointment of arbitrator.
3. Please find enclosed our Invoice Nos. 10010855 and 10010856 for your kind
attention. AIADR will transmit the case file to the Tribunal by email shortly.

Rammit Kaur (Ms.)

Case Counsel
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution
Email address: rammit@aiadr.world
Tel +(603) 2300 6032
Fax No.: +(603) 2300 6032 Encls

32
 PROCEDURAL ORDER NO. 1

Of 15 April 2022

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER THE AIADR AD HOC

ARBITRATION RULES ON APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION, AND
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

BETWEEN

RUBBER GLOVE SDN BHD

(Claimant)

AND

THE REPUBLIC OF ACASIA

(Respondent)

A preliminary meeting was held by way of video conference on 15/4/2022 at GMT 1430.
The meeting was attended by:

ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

1) Ms. Saithong (Presiding Arbitrator)

2) Professor Chung (Co-Arbitrator)

3) Thomas Bung, QC (Co-Arbitrator)

For the Claimant

1) Ms. Wei Yan, Counsel

For the Respondent

1) Mr. Ali, Counsel

33
In consultation with both the Claimant and Respondents at the preliminary meeting on
15/4/2022, the Tribunal ORDERS AND DIRECTS as follows:

1. PROCEDURAL TIMETABLE

The Parties shall adhere to the following Procedural Timetable:

Date By Action Party

20/01/2022 Notice of Arbitration Claimant
20/02/2022 Response to the Notice of Respondent
Arbitration
15/ 04/ 2022 Preliminary Meeting to Tribunal, Claimant, and
determine Procedural Respondent
Timetable
20/6/2022 Parties to file the Agreed Claimant and Respondent
list of Issues or the
Respective list of Issues
10/ 8/ 2022 Pre-Hearing Procedural Claimant and Respondent
Conference (if necessary) to
determine the Agreed List
of Issues
15/9/2022 By Agreement, Claimant to Claimant
submit their Memorial
15/9/2022 By Agreement, Respondent
Respondents to submit
their Memorial
30 /9/ 2022 Oral Hearing on evidence Tribunal, Claimant and
and law Respondent

Unless otherwise directed by this Tribunal, all documents required to be delivered and/or
acts required to be done shall be delivered or done by 17:00 hours Malaysia time on the
specified date.

34
 2. PROVISIONS, RULES, GOVERNING LAW, LANGUAGE, AND
GUIDELINES

The Parties agree that:

a. The arbitration commenced on 1/7/2022;

b. The seat of the arbitration is Kuala Lampur, Malaysia;
c. The applicable rules governing the arbitration pursuant to Article 33 (1)(e)
of the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement shall be administered
in accordance to the AIADR AD HOC ARBITRATION RULES ON
APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATION, AND FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT (the “AIADR Rules”);
d. The language of the arbitration shall be English.
e. The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration 2010
(the “IBA Rules”) may be referred to by the Tribunal as general guidelines
in this arbitration.
f. The Claimant and Respondent all respectively confirm that the Tribunal has
the jurisdiction to hear and determine all the disputes that have been
referred for resolution in this arbitration.
3. PARTIES

The Claimant is Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd and has its Malaysian office at 28 Boulevard Road,
Kuala Lampur, Malaysia, and factory at No 2 Acasia Central Industrial Park, Industrial
Road, Republic of Acasia 82000.

The Respondent is the Government of the Republic of Acasia whose address of service is
at the Office of the Attorney-General, Republic of ACASIA, No 3 Block C, Level 2, 81238
Republic of ACASIA.

4. LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

Any communications in respect of this arbitration shall be regarded as having been

validly made if and when they have been made as follows:

35
If to the Claimant:
Counsel Firm: Justlaw LLP
Address: No 3, Guran City, ASEAN Road, ASEAN Business Park,
Democratic Republic of Carado
Counsel Name: Ms. Wei Yan
Email address: weiyan@justlaw.com.cn
Tel. No.: +0086 842922600
Fax No.: +0086 842922608

If to the Respondent:

Counsel Firm: Messrs. Ali & Associates

Address: Annexed Building, No 8 Surewin Drive, Acasia.

Counsel Name: Mr. Ali

Email address: ali@aliandassociates.com

Tel. No.: +0013 3528254

Fax No.: +0003 78421608

If to the Tribunal:

Arbitrator: Ms. Saithong (Presiding Arbitrator), Professor Chung (Co-

Arbitrator), Thomas Bung, QC (Co-Arbitrator)

Email address: saithong@alsa.tribunal.com, chung@alsa.tribunal.com,

thomas@alsa.tribunal.com

Tel. No.: +0013 6890 7456

Fax No.: +0013 6302 3418

36
If to the AIADR:

Case Counsel: Ms. Rammit

Address: Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution (AIADR),

No.28-1, Medan Setia 2, Bukit Damansara, 50490, Kuala Lampur, Malaysia

Email address: rammit@aiadr.com.my Tel +(603) 2300 6032

Fax No.: +(603) 2300 6032

Any change of legal representation shall be immediately notified in writing by the party
concerned to all other parties as well as to the Tribunal and the AIADR.

5. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

All written submissions, witness statements, and expert reports shall be consecutively
paragraphed and page numbered and shall contain a table of contents. They shall be sent
to the Tribunal, the other Party and the AIADR in

(a) electronic format submissions in searchable PDF and Microsoft Word format, with
accompanying legal authorities and documents in searchable PDF format and

(b) hard copy format in A4 size and with double-sided printing and binding via courier
service sent no later than 2 working days after email transmission. For purposes of
complying with time limits, email transmission to the Tribunal, and the opposing Party
shall suffice.

6. DOCUMENT BUNDLES

All document bundles submitted by the Parties for use in these proceedings shall be
indexed and paginated in consecutive Arabic numerals.

Each bundle containing evidential documentation or legal authorities shall beprefaced by

an index setting forth:

a. For exhibits, the exhibit number, prefaced by “C” for the Claimant’sexhibits and
“R” for the Respondent’s exhibits;

37
 b. For legal authorities, the legal authority number, prefaced by “CL” forthe Claimant’s
legal authorities and “RL” for the Respondent’s legal authorities;
c. TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETATION

If any Party submits into evidence a document in any language other than English, an
English translation of the document - or of the relevant portions, inthe case of lengthy
documents - shall be submitted simultaneously with the original text. Such
documentation includes all evidential and legal materials upon which that Party relies,
including documentary evidence, factual witness statements and expert witness
statements or report.

7. DOCUMENT REQUESTS

In all document production requests, the Parties shall take into account and the Tribunal
shall be guided by the criteria set out in the IBA Rules.

8. WITNESSES

Unless the Tribunal otherwise orders, in order to make the most efficient use of time at
the Oral Hearing, written witness statements shall be used by the Partiesfor all factual
and expert witnesses in lieu of direct oral examination. All witnessstatements and expert
reports shall also include a passport-size photograph of the witness/expert.

9. ORAL HEARING

The Oral Hearing shall take place on the dates indicated in the Procedural Timetable. The
sitting hours and arrangements for the Oral Hearing are to be bythe Tribunal in further
consultation with the Parties.

10. STATUS OF ORDERS

Any order made by the Tribunal (including this Procedural Order and the Procedural
Timetable) may, at the request of a Party or upon the Tribunal’s own initiative, be varied
where the circumstances so require in the Tribunal’s discretion, after consultation with
the Parties.

38
 11. EXTENSIONS OF TIME

The Tribunal may grant extensions of time, upon application by a Party or on the
Tribunal’s own motion and whether before or after the expiry of any time limit, as
determined by the Tribunal in its discretion.

The Parties may also grant short extensions to each other, as a matter ofmutual courtesy,
so long as such extensions do not materially affect the timetable and that the Tribunal is
informed before the original due date.

12. GENERAL PROVISIONS

All written notifications and communications between the Parties and the Tribunal shall
generally be by email. However, all submissions, witness statements, expert reports,
documents, and all notifications and communications that are longer than 10 typed pages
shall be delivered by emailand confirmed in hard copy by courier service.

13. COSTS

Costs of and incidental to this Order shall be costs in the Arbitration.

14. PERMISSION TO APPLY

There shall be permission to apply.

Made this 15 April 2022

SIGNED

Tribunal

39
 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER THE AD HOC ARBITRATION
RULES ON APPOINTMENT, CASE ADMINISTRATIONAND FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT

BETWEEN RUBBER GLOVE SDN BHD

(Claimant)

AND

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ACASIA

(Respondent)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FINAL LIST OF ISSUES

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated 17 April 2022

Submitted for and on behalf of the Claimant and Respondent by:

For the Claimant

Ms. Wei Yan

Justlaw LLP

No 3, Guren City ASEAN Road

ASEAN Business Park, People’s Republic of Carado

For the Respondent

Mr. Ali

Messrs. Ali & Associates

Annexed Building

No 8 Surewin Drive, Acasia

40
Pursuant to the Procedural Order No. 1 dated 15 April 2022 issued by the Arbitral
Tribunal, the parties hereby agree on the list of issues below:

1. Whether the Respondent’s application for Dismissal should be granted?

2. Whether the hearing of the arbitration can be held in Guran City, Carado?
3. Whether the introduction of the new Tariff and Quota by the Respondent is in
breach of ACIA?
4. Whether the Claimant’s money frozen in the Acasia National Bank is in breach of
ACIA?

41
 EXHIBIT C1

Executive Order on Protecting Certain Property of ACASIA

National Bank for the Benefit of the People of Acasia
By the authority vested in me as President by laws of the Republic of Acasia, I, Joe BID., President
of the Republic of Acasia, find that the widespread humanitarian crisis in including the urgent
needs of the workers for security and livelihoods, among other basic human needs constitute an
unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the Republic of
Acasia. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat. In addition, I find that the
preservation of certain property of Rubber Glove Sdn Bhd (RGSB) held in the Acasia National
Bank is of the utmost importance to addressing this national emergency and the welfare of the
people of Acasia. This property is blocked under this order.

Accordingly, I hereby order:

The President

1 June 2021

1
 EXHIBIT C2

ACASIA VEGETABLE BAN

Last year, exports of vegetable to Carado were valued at about $3 billion, making it Acasia
most lucrative agriculture export market but the Acasia Agricultural Council says sales have
fallen by almost 30 per cent year-on-year." supply roughly has been reduced now by a third
… the suspended companies made up a hell of a lot of that, so it is hard to quantify, but
certainly it's in the many hundreds of millions of dollars that we've gone backwards on," he
said.

What's going wrong with our trade with Carado?

Tensions between Carado and Acasia have been

simmering for a while now and the rocky relationship
could be about to head to a whole new level. This was
rumored to be due to tension in the supply of AIS-20
protective gears globally by Caradonese medical firms
critized by Acasia.

Read more -

Mr Hugh said Carado's suspensions had also cost jobs, but it was difficult to distinguish to
what extent as the industry met challenges associated with AIS-20, supply issues, high
prices. Overnight, Carado announced it was blocking sales of vegetable from Acasian-base
farms. Mr Hugh said no reason had been given for the suspension and the Acasia farmers
were working with the Government to understand why it had been banned

Mr Hugh said he did not want to "pontificate in the media" as to why Carado may have
applied the ban, but said that market procedures and protocols often changed for a number
of reasons. "If Carado really wanted to send us a message loud and clear, my assumption
would be that they would have taken out a number of larger exporters of as well.

2
 EXHIBIT R1

Rubber Glove, global manufacturer of rubber gloves, has been banned from exporting its products
from Malaysia to the United States after the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) made a
finding that its products are made using forced and indentured labor. Rubber medical gloves from
a Malaysian manufacturer will be seized if they enter the US due to “conclusive evidence” they are
being made by workers under conditions of modern slavery, the CBP said. Last year the CNCC
Media found that gloves from Malaysia had been supplied to hospitals, although the Hospital
Supply Chain, an organization that manages the sourcing, delivery and supply of healthcare
products for the States, stated that it no longer had a contract with the company. “We will not
tolerate foreign companies’ exploitation of vulnerable workers to sell cheap, unethically-made
goods to American consumers,” Hunter, a senior official, said in a statement. The ruling marks an
escalation in measures against the company after the agency first imposed sanctions on it last
June.

Read more -

The majority of workers at Malaysia are migrants from Republic of Acasia. Many were forced to
pay high fees to recruitment agents to secure their jobs, leaving them vulnerable to debt bondage.
Workers have alleged they are put to work for 13-hour shifts 7 days a week – with some earning
as little as USD10-12 a day – and live in packed dormitories shared by more than 30 workers.

3
EXHIBIT R2

4
 Moot Problem Provided by

Special Thanks to

Mr. Dato Ricky Tan

Ms. Wei Yan Ting

Prof. Choong Yeow Choy

Ms. Rammit Kaur Charan Singh

for the drafting of 2022 AIMCC Moot Problem