04-06-2018

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EDITORIAL MONDAY, JuNe 4, 2018 4 Monumental mistake to pull US troops from South Korea Acting Editor & Publisher : Jobaer Alam Telephone: +8802-9104683-84, Fax: 9127103 e-mail: editor@thebangladeshtoday.com Monday, June 4, 2018 World awaits Kim-Trump talks with great expectation The world is, with bated anticipation, watching the ever changing developments regarding the upcoming high profile meeting between President of the United States Donald Trump, and President of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea- Kim Jong-un. The meeting (the first ever in history between the two heads of states) is supposed to take place on June 12 and is supposed to discuss Korean denuclearization and other vital issues. While the events leading up to the meeting have been nothing short of "mercurial", it is crucial that both leaders, and by extensions, their advisors, realize the gravity and importance of the meeting. For if successful, it may usher in a new era of peace and prosperity for the Korean peninsula while cutting US defense spending and cementing President Donald Trump's reputation as a very able statesman and foreign policy manager. Talks have happened before for such meetings to take place. Attempts have been made, however, never has any attempt come so close to fruition. The willingness of both parties seems more sincere than ever; there has been much speculation as to why, despite the verbal mudslinging by both leaders, would decide to forget the past and give peace a chance. Just months ago, Trump had called President Kim Jong-un "fat and short" in retaliation for calling him a dotard (old lunatic). At that point, it seemed nigh impossible that these two leaders could ever come to respect each other, let alone agree on anything. Speculation has, therefore, been high as to what could have propelled both sides to agree to such a meeting. It could be that North Korean leadership feels that they have finally achieved all of their goals and that further nuclear enrichment will only cause further great harms in way of intolerable economic sanctions and too low a point in regime acceptance. They have a missile that can reach the united States, and a nuclear weapon that can be mounted on it, effectively creating a deterrent (though vastly disproportionate) against the US. Particularly this aspect must have been sinking in the minds of the North Korean dictator that he risked the full fury of an all out military attack on his tiny country including a nuclear barrage - much sooner than later -- by the very mighty United States. They may feel this immediately endangers regime survival and acted quickly to scuttle the grim threat hanging over their country. It could also be the new crippling sanctions that were imposed by the Trump Administration; or, it could be a combination of both. President Trump may view this opportunity as a way to increase his credibility as a world leader and to finally silence some of his most vicious critics. Indeed, if he manages to successfully captain this "denuclearization ship", most of his staunch critics, who paint him as a warmongering bully will have to find new facets in his leadership to criticize. It will also fulfill Trump's promise to reduce overseas commitment and further emphasize his "America First" agenda- an agenda that won him so much support. It would also highlight and further legitimize his policies as being more effective; seeing that former President Barack Obama's policy of "Strategic Patience" regarding North Korea failed to curb their aggression and nuclear ambitions completely. This meeting could be a new era for not only the Korean peninsula, but also for the United States, it may set a ton for future US foreign policies; will lessen the reputation of the United States as a war mongering interventionist. It will also free up agenda and allow the US President to focus more on other foreign issues, like that of Taiwan. It could allow the Unites States more room to maneuver and one less ally for rival China as the policy may result in the thawing of relations between the United States and North Korea. One thing is for certain, there exists and unprecedented opportunity to end or at least drastically deescalate a rivalry that has spawned the most heavily armed border in the world (The DMZ) and at the same time, score major personal victories for both presidents. President Donald Trump has the opportunity to prove to the world that he is willing to set aside past rivalries, let go of military threats and give peace a chance. His credibility will also vastly improve, both as a diplomat and as a capable leader and it might lead to him having more influence in the US legislature and the world stage. President Kim Jong-un has the opportunity to undo the chokehold of sanctions that has been crippling the Korean economy and has pushed the general population into poverty and deprivation. Therefore, it is imperative that both nations and their heads of state take this upcoming meeting seriously and put the greatest of effort to make it successful. Donald Trump's presidency is forcing the foreign policy establishment to re-examine issues that had long been considered settled. A case in point is the US troop presence in South Korea. Recent reports indicate that Trump has sought the withdrawal of some or all of the 28,000 US troops in South Korea, and has considered using the US presence as a bargaining chip in nuclear negotiations with North Korea. Those reports have alarmed foreign policy experts in both political parties, who cite it as one more example of Trump's geopolitical recklessness. Trump is not, however, the first president to scrutinise the American presence in South Korea. Jimmy Carter, for example, tried to withdraw American ground forces altogether. And the number of US troops has decreased over time, down from as many as 70,000 in the late 1950s. So instead of being greeted by outrage, Trump's inclination should raise a question that deserves a fuller answer: Why does America have troops in South Korea 65 years after the Korean War ended, and what does it get from the bargain? The answer is that the benefits are indeed substantial, but also difficult to quantify, which is why the whole arrangement seems so unsatisfactory to Trump. The strategic advantages of the US troop presence revolve around the twin imperatives of deterrence and reassurance. Regarding deterrence, US troops help keep an aggressive North Korean regime in check. The Korean War started because Kim Il Sung, grandfather of the current leader Kim Jong Un, calculated that Washington would not intervene to stop him from conquering South Korea - or that if it did, it could not arrive in time to make a difference. His miscalculation touched off a ghastly conflict that killed millions, including more than 30,000 US troops. Thus the purpose of US troops in South Korea has been to show, with unmistakable clarity, that America would be in the next Korean War from the outset - that even if the North could somehow defeat South Korean forces, it would face the full might of the US. It is impossible to know, of course, whether Pyongyang would be so bold as to attack South Korea absent the US presence. But given that reunification of the peninsula is a stated goal of North Korean policy, given how brutal and violent North Korean policy has sometimes been even with US troops sitting across the demilitarised zone, and given that Pyongyang has been working relentlessly to develop increasingly advanced weapons, it is not hard to imagine things taking a turn for the worse absent the restraining effect of American presence. Yet if US troops are there to hAl BRANDS restrain the enemy, they are also there to restrain America's ally. Today, South Korea is a peaceful democracy, but the US troop presence still has a moderating effect on Seoul. By reassuring the South Koreans that Washington is fully committed to their defence, the American presence stifles the urge for Seoul to take other, more destabilising steps to ensure its safety - such as developing nuclear weapons of its own. When the American military appeared to be pulling back from Asia in the 1970s, in fact, South Korea took steps toward building a nuclear arsenal. Since then, there has been a tacit bargain: The US maintains a tangible, visible commitment to South Korea, and South Korea foregoes the nuclear weapons it could easily develop. The US troop presence is the key to deterrence and reassurance on the Korean Peninsula, bringing tenuous stability to an important part of the world. The trouble, however, is that the benefits of this arrangement - peace, stability, a climate conducive to commerce and prosperity - are inherently nebulous. They are also inherently counterfactual, because BASIl M.K. Al-GhAlAyINI they rely on judgements about the bad things that might happen if the US stopped doing what it does. The US deployment makes both American and South Korean forces far more lethal in the event of war, by allowing them to train together constantly. It also provides leverage Washington can use to further other foreign policy objectives. South Korea sent forces overseas in support of America's global war on terrorism in part to assure the US that Seoul was as committed to the alliance as Washington was - the sort of transactional bargain Trump can surely appreciate. And although Trump has often derided the US-South Korea free trade agreement, Washington got a better deal than the European Union did in similar negotiations, because Seoul was eager to please a country that contributes so much to its defence. It would surely take the presence of more than one US soldier to affirm the commitment to South Korea, and American forces should be capable of defending themselves and conducting effective operations. But whether the right number is 28,000 or 18,000 or 38,000 can be profitably reconsidered from time to time. Whatever the precise number, though, the lesson of this episode is that those who believe that some substantial US presence on the Korean Peninsula is necessary will have to do better at explaining the benefits of that deployment. Because in the age of Trump, all the verities of US policy are up for debate. Source : Gulf News Red Sea project a positive step in right direction Picture luxury beach destinations and you probably conjure dreamy images of the Maldives or Seychelles, but Saudi Arabia? Not so much. But that will soon change with an ambitious plan to develop part of the Kingdom's west coast into a Red Sea resort. This giga-project will cover 50 islands and 34,000 square kilometers - an area bigger than Belgium. In my opinion, this is a smart move by the government to convert the best piece of the Red Sea into a global tourism destination of choice for as many as one million visitors per year in less than two decades. Not only that, it will also be in close proximity to Madain Saleh, the location of 131 cut monumental tombs that is considered a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. Such mammoth development is being backed by the country's sovereign wealth fund, the Public Investment Fund, and is set to create up to 35,000 jobs and add up to $4 billion to the economy Censorship of some political opinions silences parts of the population. That is true in parts of Asia. But that's not the end of the story. Censorship, though in a lighter sense, also exists in the West. This Western-lite kind of censorship undermines those advocating for freedom of speech as a global human right, fueling the counterargument that the West is hypocritical. Why does this perception exist in the world? Arguably one needs to share the same blind spot, in line with the opinion of media elites, disregarding that certain content is given constant attention by media elites, while content against their views is disenfranchised, even silenced, and is not printed, posted, or broadcasted by media elites with a consensus on certain issues. But it's getting problematic for democracy, when media elites do not grant others the same right, instead acting as content "gatekeepers" (Mihály Csíkszentmihályi), protecting their bastion, their panels as their echo chamber, and propagating their views (often declared as "truth") while silencing all those they dislike, disenfranchising and marginalizing them from being aired and suppressing them to the realm of legends (often code for social media). While media elites act as prophets of the truth, their behavior - by many perceived as suppression - makes a class conflict obvious. A class conflict between the so-called upper class, fancying themselves to be educated, definitely in control of established media, and the silent majority, the silenced majority, often defamed by the The strategic advantages of the US troop presence revolve around the twin imperatives of deterrence and reassurance. Regarding deterrence, US troops help keep an aggressive North Korean regime in check. The Korean War started because Kim Il Sung, grandfather of the current leader Kim Jong Un, calculated that Washington would not intervene to stop him from conquering South Korea - or that if it did, it could not arrive in time to make a difference. each year once completed. As the enabler of this promising project, the PIF will invite local and global investors to participate in it. It was music to my ears to learn that the Virgin Group founder, Richard Branson, was the first international investor to commit to the project. The great benefit of tourism is that every dollar coming into the industry is quickly felt by business owners and staff, and is directly related to a boost in local spending. This week, the Saudi Ministry of Isn’t freedom of speech the foundation of democracy? IMMANUel FRUhMANN upper echelon of media elites as not classy, not educated enough to be represented with their opinions, and therefore at best only having their voices heard in social media. Is it really best to silence those you dislike? Doesn't it make them "martyrs"? Doesn't censorship (even the lite form), highlighting one piece of content and silencing the other, highlight a democracy's deficiencies? Doesn't also lite censorship prove the immaturity of a democracy? Is it a fake democracy then, ruled by a few, whose best thought is silencing, censoring those they dislike, people whose opinions are not in line with theirs? What happened to freedom of speech in public discourse? Did we ever have it? How serious are media elites about freedom of speech in times of democratization via social media (where everyone with access can express his/her opinion)? How serious are media elites about freedom of speech when, under their reign, Commerce and Investment registered the Red Sea Development Company as a closed joint-stock company wholly owned by the PIF. It also assigned John Pagano, the former managing director for development of the Canary Wharf Group in London, as the company's chief executive Such mammoth development is being backed by the country's sovereign wealth fund, the Public Investment Fund, and is set to create up to 35,000 jobs and add up to $4 billion to the economy each year once completed. As the enabler of this promising project, the PIF will invite local and global investors to participate in it. It was music to my ears to learn that the Virgin Group founder, Richard Branson, was the first international investor to commit to the project. officer. The newly incorporated company will now move forward with the creation of its special economic zone, with its own regulatory framework As a licensed scuba diver myself, political content they dislike is censored in one way or another, and if some had their way, would also be on social media. Western media elites are obviously serious about freedom of speech, but seemingly only to maintain power, only as long as they are hearing what they like, meanwhile censoring content that is not to their liking. As you cannot have freedom of speech without democratization and emancipation, do media elites really understand the underlying principle of free speech? Do you really think that in the old days, when the US Constitution was crafted and the First Amendment for freedom of speech was implemented, that the situation on the streets was civilized or educated, ie everyone behaved well and only used nice words? The opposite was the case when the ideas of Voltaire and of other philosophers built the groundwork for the US Constitution ratified in 1788. Do you really think that in the old days, when the US Constitution was crafted and the First Amendment for freedom of speech was implemented, that the situation on the streets was civilized or educated, ie everyone behaved well and only used nice words? The opposite was the case when the ideas of Voltaire and of other philosophers built the groundwork for the US Constitution ratified in 1788. Now, do media elites really think that I cannot wait to market our country's breathtaking historical wonders and natural beauty through our annual BMG Summer Retreat at the London Stock Exchange on July 11, and hopefully one day we will host an international Polo Cup with the participation of the Duke of Cambridge or the Duke of Sussex. Tourism allows wealth to be injected into a community in a variety of ways. The great benefit of this industry is that it is extremely labor-intensive, and many of the businesses that operate within it are only small or micro operators. This means that the benefits of every dollar coming into the industry is quickly felt by business owners and staff, and is directly related to a boost in local spending. I believe the opening of the borders is a positive step in the right direction, and will give further impetus to inbound travel to the country, which is much needed. Source : Arab news the aformentioned philosophers didn't thoroughly tthink through what they wrote? Do media elites really think their writings were crafted only to respect the opinions and views of the rich, powerful and educated? It's very concerning to see media elites in power taking these liberties, but not granting them to others, since they silence certain voices, certain segments of the population that express views they dislike. Are media elites thinking that if they silence opposing opinions consistently they can extinguish them? Wouldn't it be better for media elites, instead of disenfranchising, silencing opinions they dislike and having to deny allegations of censoring, patronizing, policing, disciplining the public for divergent opinions - also known as "educating the public" - not to silence the public, but to train themselves and the public in ideological criticism and the sociology of knowledge? They need to be aware of the three sluice gates through which partisan interests can infiltrate: information, selection and application, influenced by what media elites think is best for the country, ie what they think it means to be on the right side of history? How healthy is a democracy in which media elites have nothing better to do than use their power to exclude large parts of the population, manipulating the public from their ivory towers? Highly ideologized censorship exists not just in parts of Asia but also in a lighter form in the West. Source : Asia times
LAW & PEOPLE MOndAy, June 21, 2018 5 LegAL Query : Dear Sir, I want to attain a patent registration. Please inform me the details. Regards, Shariul Islam Dhaka. LegAL OpInIOn : Legal Opinion- An application for a patent may be made by any person alone or jointly with any other person. The application must be made in the prescribed form, and must be filed at the Patent Office in the prescribed manner. The application must contain a declaration to the effect that the applicant is in possession of an invention, whereof he, or in the case of a joint application one at least of the applicants, claims to be the true and first inventor or the legal representative or assign of such inventor and for which he desires to obtain a patent, and must be accompanied by complete specification. Specifications: A complete specification must particularly describe and ascertain the nature of the invention and the manner in which the same is to be performed. The specification must commence with the title, and in the case of a complete specification must end with a distinct statement of the invention claimed. The drawings can be supplied at any time before the acceptance of the application, but we suggest to file drawings at the time of application printed on tracing papers. PCT Application in Bangladesh: In case of claiming priority based on any application filed in any PCT countries the This week Your Legal Adviser is A.B.M Shahjahan Akanda (Masum) Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh. He is the Head of the chamber of a renowned law firm, namely, 'Law for Nations', which has expertise mainly in banking law, tax law, commercial law, corporate law, family law, employment and labor law, land law,constitutional law, criminal law and in conducting litigations before courts of different hierarchies. He can be reached at - cell:01711459590, E-mail: law.abm@gmail.com. applicant must supply the information of PCT application at the time of filing the national application and submit certified copy of the specification of the foreign patent application within 90 days time from the date of filing application in Bangladesh. Filing Requirement: To file a Patent Application we need the followings: (a) Name of the inventor (applicant), (b) Address(s) and nationality of the inventors, (c) Two sets of specification and one set of drawing on tracing paper (transparent), (d) Legalized Deed of Assignment (if any), (e) Power of Attorney [Form – 31], you can download the authorization from this web by clicking download forms. (f) Certified copy of the foreign patent (in case of claiming priority) Advertisement on acceptance of application: On the acceptance of an application the Controller shall give notice thereof to the applicant and shall advertise the acceptance and with the drawings (if any) shall be open to public inspection. Opposition: Any person at any time within four months from the date of the advertisement of the acceptance of an application give notice at the Patent Office of opposition to the grant of the patent. The opponent must state the grounds of his opposition. grant and sealing of patent: If there is no opposition a patent shall be granted, subject to such conditions as the authority thinks expedient, to the applicant, or in the case of a joint application to the applicants jointly, and the Controller shall cause the Patent to be sealed with the seal of the Patent Office. Term of patent: The term limited in every patent for the duration thereof is sixteen years from its date of application or the date of priority application. Renewal is required for fifth year before expiry of fourth year up to the 15 years. Grace period is 90 days with late fees. In case of priority, the commencement of four years shall start from the date of priority application. Career Workshop Organized by nILS Bangladesh at university of Ctg MuhOMMOdMAMun The Bangladesh Chapter of Network for Int’l Law Students (NILS), an international, independent, non-political and non-profit organization contributing to the legal field of education, has organized the first ever Law Career Workshop in Bangldeshcoupled with exclusive internship opportunity, titled 'Career opportunity: Way to thriving legal industry', in association with Department of Law, University of Chittagong, at A K Khan Law Faculty Auditorium on 5th January 2018. More than 500 enthusiastic law students from 25 different universities of Bangladesh attended the workshop spontaneously. The workshop was auspicated by the welcoming speech of Ms. Nasrin Sultana, President of NILS Bangladesh, who warmly welcomed the participants of the workshop, presented an overview of the past activities of NILS and clarified about its aims & objectives as well. Following the inauguration ceremony, two sessions of the workshop were held. The first session was composed of lectures given by distinguished guest speakers of the workshop. Senior District & Sessions Judge (Rtd) Md. MasdarHossain, media personnel& news presenter of Channel 24 as well as Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh,Mr. Manzur Al Matin& Assistant Professor of Department of Law, University of Chittagong,Mr. SaeedAhsan Khalid got the floor in that session. Honorable guest speakers exhibited a crystal clear view of the opportunities for law students in professional career before the participants as well as provided accessory tips, techniques and directions regarding how to grab those opportunities. Following that, an interactive session was held between the panel speakers and the participants of the workshop. The session was repleted with the presence of highly qualified professional personalities of the legal field. The Senior Assistant Secretary of Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division, Ministry of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs, MasomaZaman, Assistant Director (Legal) of Bangladesh Bank, Mr. Jahed Hoshen, Deputy Secretary of Finance ministry, Tonima Tasnim, Senior ASP, Immigration In- Charge of HazratShahjalal International Airport, Mr. Mansur Alam Kaderi, Lieutenant of JAG Branch ofBangladesh Navy, Mr. Faruqul Islam, Metropolitan Magistrate of Chittagong, Mr. Mohammad Al Imran Khan and two advocates of Bangladesh Supreme Court, Barrister Suhan Khan and Mr. Mokarramus Shaklan appeared as the panel speakers before the participants in that session. The respected panel speakers presented short speeches on and about their profession with necessary directionsfor the students. Afterwards, the floor was open for the participants to place their queries before the speakers. The curious participants placed their queries and got satisfactory responses from the speakers. Thesession came to conclusion. The inauguration ceremony was chaired by the Dean of Faculty of Law, University of Chittagong, Professor A B M Abu Noman while Vice Chancellor of Chittagong University, Professor Dr. Iftekhar Uddin Chowdhury ornamented the ceremony as the Chief Guest. Christine Richardson, Chairman & Associate Professor of Department of Land Law & Management, Jagannath University and Md. MasdarHossain, Senior District & Sessions Judge (Rtd) facilitated the ceremony as special guests. Moreover, upon the whole day's performance, one of the participants was awarded the best performer of the workshop and certificate of participation was given to all the participants of the workshop. expanding Investment Securities : The role of Investment Treaties andInvestment Arbitration in Bangladesh Md. MAMOnOr rAShId Large-scale investments made in foreign jurisdictions face many risks, particularly when investing in countries with high levels of political and regulatory risk or developing judicial systems, as is often a concern for international investors entering certain Asian and African countries. In such circumstances, investors are particularly concerned about the legal protections that are available to them during the life of their investments. Bilateral and multilateral investment treaties (“BITs”, “MITs”) have become the principle vehicle to overcome these challenges and mitigate the risks of government intervention. BITs are international law instruments – treaties – agreed between two states. MITs are treaties agreed between more than two states. The purpose of BITs and MITs is to create a stable legal environment that fosters foreign direct investment. This is achieved by the “host state” (i.e. the state in which the investment is made) agreeing to provide certain guarantees and standards of protection to the investments of private foreign investors (i.e. those with the nationality of, or incorporation in, the “home state”). The investor is also provided with the opportunity to enforce its rights under the investment treaty against the host state through independent international investment arbitration. This is the major innovation of investment treaties, as traditionally it was only states that had standing to bring claims against each other. Rights and obligations under investment treaties are reciprocal, protecting the investments of investors from each state in the territory of the other state. Structuring investments correctly can maximise those rights and protections, and has become a modern commercial imperative when transacting internationally. Expanding investment securities: When structuring foreign investments, prudent investors will seek advice on the protections available under the domestic legislation of the host state as well as the investment treaties to which that host state is a party. In order to rely on the protections offered by a particular BIT, a foreign investor will need to qualify as a defined “investor”, as mentioned above, and its “investment” must fall within the definition of the protected type of investments under the relevant BIT. Most BITs adopt a broad definition of qualifying investments, ranging from tangible to intangible property, company shares to contractual rights. The common categories of substantive BIT protections and guarantees owed by host states to foreign investors/ investments include the following: No expropriation without compensation: not to expropriate investments unless it is for a public purpose, in accordance with law and due process, with the provision of prompt, adequate and effective compensation; Fair and equitable treatment: all investors/ investments will be treated fairly and equitably (an open category that includes upholding legitimate expectations, the rule of law and good faith etc.); Full protection and security: including to maintain the investor’s legal rights and protect physical assets from insurrection; No discrimination: not to adopt measures that discriminate investments based on type, industry, nationality etc.; National treatment: not to treat foreign investors/ investments less favourably that domestic investors/ investments; Most favoured nation treatment: the most favourable treatment available to investors/ investments of one state will be afforded to investors/ investments of other states; Umbrella clause: general commercial contracts with the host state and investor are elevated to protection under the BIT; and Free transfers: investors may convert investment returns into a currency of their choice and repatriate out of the host state. Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment Major laws affecting foreign investment include: the Foreign Private Investment (Promotion and Protection) Act of 1980, the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority Act of 1980, the Companies Act of 1994, the Telecommunications Act of 2001, the Industrial Policy Act of 2005, the Industrial Policy Act of 2010, and the Bangladesh Economic Zones Act 2010. The Industrial Policy Act of 2016 was approved by the Cabinet Committee on Industrial Purchase on February 24, 2016 and replaces the Industrial Policy of 2010. The Industrial Policy Act of 2016, which replaced the 2010 Act, offers incentives for “green”, high-tech, or “transformative” industries. Foreign investors who invest $1 million or transfer $2 million to a recognized financial institution can apply for Bangladeshi citizenship. The Government of Bangladesh will provide financial and policy support for highpriority industries (those that create large-scale employment and earn substantial export revenue) and creative (architecture, arts and antiques, fashion design, film and video, interactive laser software, software, and computer and media programming) industries. Specific importance will be given to agriculture and food processing, ready-made garments (RMG), information and communication technology (ICT) and software, pharmaceuticals, leather and leather products, and jute and jute goods. International investment arbitration and Dispute Settlement: International investment arbitration is a mechanism to resolve investment disputes between a foreign investor and the state hosting the investment. It is different in many respects from international commercial arbitration, which involves two private parties, usually corporations. ICSID Convention and New York Convention Bangladesh is a signatory to the International Convention for the Settlement of Disputes (ICSID) and it consented in May 1992 to the United Nations Convention for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Alternative dispute resolutions are possible under the Bangladesh Arbitration Act of 2001. The current legislation allows for enforcement of arbitral awards. Investor-State Dispute Settlement Bangladeshi law allows contracts to refer dispute settlement to third country forums for resolution. Bangladesh is also a party to the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Agreement for the Establishment of an Arbitration Council, signed November 2005, which aims to establish a permanent center for alternative dispute resolution in one of the SAARC member countries. In practice, enforcement of arbitration results is applied unevenly and the government has challenged ICSID rulings, especially those that involve rulings against the government. The timeframe for dispute resolution is unpredictable and has no set limit. It can be done as quickly as a few months, but often takes years depending on the type of dispute. Anecdotal information indicates average resolution times can be as high as 16 years. Local courts may be biased against foreign investors in resolving disputes. Bangladesh is a signatory of the New York Convention and recognizes the enforcement of international arbitration awards. Domestic arbitration is under the authority of the District Judge Court bench and foreign arbitration is under the authority of the relevant High Court division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. Investors are also increasingly turning to the Bangladesh International Arbitration Center (BIAC) for dispute resolution. BIAC is an independent arbitration center established by prominent local business leaders in April 2011 to improve commercial dispute resolution in Bangladesh to stimulate economic growth. The council committee is headed by the President of International Chamber of Commerce – Bangladesh (ICC,B) and includes the presidents of other prominent chambers such as like Dhaka Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DCCI) and Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MCCI). The center operates under the Bangladesh Arbitration Act of 2001. According to BIAC, fast track cases are resolved in approximately six months while typical cases are resolved in one year. Major Bangladeshi trade and business associations such as the American Chamber of Commerce in Bangladesh (AmCham) can sometimes help to resolve transaction disputes. Author: Mr. Md. Mamonor Rashid has completed his Master of Laws by thesis (Equivalent to M.Phil) on International Commercial Arbitration from University Utara Malaysia with Post Graduate Scholarship. Associate; Bhuiyan& Mir Law Firm. President; “The Orator” (For Legal Minds). He is a devoted social worker. He has worked with many national and international NGO’s including Amnesty International, United Nations Volunteer (UNV), International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr’b) and National Human Right Commission, Bangladesh. His areas of specializationareInternational Commercial Arbitration, Religious Arbitration, and Corporate Law. He is the Young Professional member of Singapore International Arbitration Centre (YSIAC), Singapore and Young International Arbitration Group (YIAG), London. Email Address: mamon_rashid@live.com
Page 1 and 2: MOnday Dhaka:June 4, 2018; Jaisthya
Page 3: METRO MonDAY, JUne 4, 2018 3 ACC fo
Page 7 and 8: INTERNATIONAL MONDAY, JUNE 4, 2018
Page 9 and 10: SPORTS MONDAY, JUNE 4, 2018 9 The A
Page 11 and 12: MISCELLANEOUS MoNDAY, jUNe 4, 2018

04-06-2018

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?