On May 25, 2023, Laos published Decision on the Registration of Importers and Exporters of Goods No. 0752, which requires importers and exporters to register their activities and the related goods with the Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MOIC). The MOIC’s goal is to create a database to monitor imports and exports and collect data on the flow of goods in and out of Laos. The decision also aims to regulate the import and export of goods to and from Laos by foreign traders who do not have a local presence. Once the decision takes effect on July 6, 2023, import and export of goods will be possible only upon registration by the importers or exporters with the MOIC. This registration requirement is in addition to the current mandate that importers and exporters operating in Laos obtain a Business Operating License from the MOIC. Activities Subject to the Decision Under the decision, the obligation to register applies to individuals and entities that import or export goods for which the revenues and payments are controlled by the government as well as “goods that have a quick impact on the lives of the population.” Although it is not yet clear which products the MOIC has in mind, further clarifications are expected. Under the current regulatory framework in Laos, some goods need an import-export permit prior to crossing the Lao border, in accordance with a 2022 regulation listing goods subject to the permitting requirement. It is possible that the goods regulated by the new decision could be the same as those defined in the 2022 list (see here for a Lao-language list)—such as drugs, medical products, land vehicles, petrol, and hazardous chemicals—but further confirmation and clarification will be necessary to determine this. Importers and Exporters Subject to the Decision The decision applies to both local and foreign operators,

Vietnam’s Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) organized a workshop with industry representatives on June 19, 2023, to discuss its future policy direction for over-the-top (OTT) telecom services and internet data center (IDC) and cloud computing services. OTT telecom services, in the MIC’s interpretation, are communication services such as text messages or voice calls provided over the internet—for example, the services of Zalo, WhatsApp, WeChat, etc. The workshop, the first in an expected series, focused only on the discussion of policy on how to regulate these services. Light-Touch Management Approach A very positive signal of the MIC in the workshop was its clear intention to apply a “light-touch” approach to management. For cross-border provision of OTT telecom services and IDC/cloud computing services, the MIC intends to require notification and a post-check mechanism, instead of a heavy licensing or commercial arrangement regime like the one applicable to traditional telecom services. In addition, there is no limitation on foreign investment if foreigners would like to provide these services in Vietnam. With regard to domestic service providers, the MIC proposes a registration regime with a similar post-check mechanism. The MIC’s reason for registration instead of notification is because the provision of these services by domestic companies may involve setting up data center/cloud systems which require consideration of various issues including location, electricity sources, and connection with telecom infrastructure such as marine cable. However, the MIC is also hoping to make the registration process as light as possible for enterprises (for example, using online registration) to provide a favorable environment and conditions to facilitate development of the industry without obstacles or cumbersome administrative procedures for companies’ operations. For providers of these services, the MIC is also considering an exemption from the responsibility to pay fees for telecommunications activities rights, and from payment to the Telecom Universal Service Fund,

April and May witnessed intriguing developments within Vietnam’s intellectual property community. On the legislation side, of particular note was the issuance of Decree No. 17/2023/ND-CP on April 26, coinciding with World IP Day. Decree 17 provides guidance on implementation of the 2022 Intellectual Property Law with regard to copyright and related rights, and has garnered significant attention due to several issues, especially the liability of intermediary (internet) service providers and copyright violation in the digital environment. Additionally, two noteworthy IP cases have emerged, albeit with limited public disclosure and awareness of specific details. Nonetheless, these cases are expected to have far-reaching implications. Copyright: Criminal Case Against Unauthorized Broadcasting of Football Matches For a considerable period of time, Vietnamese football enthusiasts have enjoyed being able to watch matches on TV and online from numerous top global football leagues. While many of these broadcasts were legitimate, with the rights purchased by Vietnamese and regional broadcasters, the unauthorized transmission and broadcasting of football matches on the internet has become increasingly prevalent. Authorities have seemingly faced challenges in curbing this issue through criminal action. In a positive development, in early May the Hanoi police decided to open a criminal proceeding against the unauthorized transmission and broadcasting of high-profile overseas football matches after a rigorous two-year investigation. Prior to this decision, authorities encountered difficulties in accurately determining the relevant laws and the nature of the violation to meet the requirements for prosecution. Specifically, they grappled with the question of whether a football match, or more specifically, a recorded video of a football match, could be considered a copyrighted work. If copyright protection extended to football matches and/or recorded videos, then transmitting and broadcasting these matches directly through the internet could be deemed illegal acts of copying or distributing (copyrighted) works, as outlined in Article 225 of the Criminal

Thailand is not a signatory to the Cape Town Convention. This means that upon an airline-lessee’s default, a lessor cannot present an Irrevocable Deregistration and Export Authorization (IDERA) document to easily repossess an aircraft. However, Thai law does allow for lessors to obtain aircraft deregisteration without the need to go to court. Pursuant to Clause 12 of the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT) Regulation No. 23 (Reg. 23), the Director General of CAAT has the authority to deregister an aircraft when the possessory right to the aircraft under a lease agreement has expired for any of the following reasons: The lease agreement has expired due to the lease term; The lease agreement has been terminated by either the lessor or the lessee in accordance with its termination clause; The lessor and lessee agree to terminate the lease agreement; The lessor notifies the termination of the lease agreement and submits an irrevocable deregistration power of attorney together with an application requesting the exportation of the aircraft, and the lessor or its agent submits an application for deregistration of the aircraft to the Director General. Under Reg. 23, a lessor can submit a deregistration application to CAAT asking CAAT to deregister. The deregistration application consists of evidence of the lease termination, a deregistration power of attorney (DPOA), the applicant’s certificate of incorporation, and the aircraft’s certificate of airworthiness and Certificate of Registration. CAAT will review the application and ask the lessee if it consents to the deregistration. If the lessee does not consent, CAAT may invite the lessor and lessee to one or more administrative hearings to give evidence on the dispute. If CAAT concludes that the lease has been validly terminated and the lessee no longer has possessory rights, CAAT will deregister the aircraft. Under Thai law, a lessor can terminate its aircraft lease agreement in

Myanmar’s Customs Department issued an internal order reducing customs duty on imports of semi-knocked-down (SKD) and completely knocked-down (CKD) vehicle systems effective for the period of June 1, 2023, to May 31, 2024. The order follows Ministry of Planning and Finance (MOPF) Notification 37/2023, which reduced customs duty on SKD and CKD vehicles and repealed the similar MOPF notifications issued in 2020 and 2021. The order announced the following new customs duty rates for SKD systems: Passenger vehicles: 5% (reduced from 7.5%) Motorcycles: 1.5% (reduced from 3%) Three-wheeled motorcycles: 3% (reduced from 7.5%) Buses: 3% (reduced from 7.5%) Trucks and trucks for body building: 3% (reduced from 7.5%) The customs duty rates for CKD systems have been set as follows: Passenger vehicles: 3% (reduced from 5%) Motorcycles: 1.5% (reduced from 3%) Three-wheeled motorcycles for transportation of passengers: 1.5% (reduced from 5%) Three-wheeled motorcycles for transportation of goods: 3% (reduced from 5%) Buses: 3% (reduced from 5%) Trucks and trucks for body building: 3% (reduced from 5%) The September 2021 suspension of permits for the import of new completely built-up (CBU) vehicles from abroad is unlikely to be impacted by the announcement. For more details on these customs duty reductions, or on any aspect of Myanmar’s regulations surrounding international trade, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected].

At a conference organized by Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS) on June 7, 2023, government officials provided more guidance on the recently issued Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD), which is set to take effect on July 1, 2023. Key takeaways included the following: A national portal on personal data protection for online submission of notifications and registrations will be launched before July 1, 2023. The MPS also plans to issue templates for data processing impact assessments (DPIAs) and transfer impact assessments (TIAs) in the near future. The PDPD requires data controllers, data processors, and data controller-processors to prepare a DPIA at the start of personal data processing. The MPS clarified that the DPIA is expected to be prepared and submitted once. Only changes to its content would require submission of an updated DPIA. Both DPIAs and TIAs (which are for cross-border data transfers) must be prepared in Vietnamese. Since the sale and purchase of personal data is strictly prohibited unless explicitly permitted by law, the MPS has handled approximately 14 cases involving unlawful trading of personal data, including sensitive data. Under the PDPD, sensitive data has a broader definition than under the GDPR (the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation), and also includes location data, creditworthiness, and personal financial data. Consent is not a legal basis for the trading of personal data, including sensitive data. The 72-hour timeline for responding to a data subject’s request does not mean 72 working or business hours. Rather, it means 72 actual consecutive hours. Any organization transferring the personal data of Vietnamese citizens outside of Vietnam must comply with the PDPD, regardless of the organization’s location. For organizations incorporated overseas that must comply with the PDPD, there is no requirement to appoint a local representative (unlike the GDPR)—but appointment of a data protection officer (DPO) may be required. As the enforcement for

In recent years, Vietnamese companies have shown increased interest in listing their shares or depository receipts (where a bank acts as custodian of underlying shares) on foreign stock exchanges. These overseas listings offer undeniable advantages, such as access to capital at high valuation, the improvement of corporate management and internal control with higher transparency and efficiency, the enhancement of stock liquidity for foreign shareholders, and increased visibility on the global market. However, the process for overseas listing is costly and time-consuming, and companies would be well advised to gain a basic understanding of the process before deciding to enter foreign stock markets. In general, to list on a foreign stock exchange, a Vietnamese company can consider the options of either (i) dual listing or (ii) restructuring as a subsidiary of an offshore parent who will list overseas. Dual Listing Dual listing allows a company to be concurrently listed on a Vietnamese stock exchange and on one or more foreign stock exchanges, such as those in Singapore, the U.S. or the U.K. This option is subject to conditions and procedures under the securities laws of Vietnam, which primarily include the Law on Securities of 2019 and its guiding Decree No. 155/2020/ND-CP. A Vietnamese company may only proceed with offshore initial public offering (IPO) procedures in accordance with foreign laws after obtaining approvals from the State Securities Commission of Vietnam (SSC) for overseas listing of shares or depository receipts. Numerous requirements apply, including, among others: Being a listed company in Vietnam; Complying with Vietnamese regulations on foreign ownership limitation and foreign exchange management; Adopting a resolution by the General Meeting of Shareholders to approve the overseas listing; Obtaining approval from the specialized authorities if the company to be listed engages in conditional business operations (e.g., the State Bank of Vietnam for banks, the Ministry of Finance of Vietnam for

Arbitration specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution team in Bangkok contributed the Thailand chapter to the recently published Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards Guide from Global Arbitration Review (GAR). The Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards Guide addresses the evolving realities of today’s legal landscape, in which enforcement of arbitral awards is a growing concern. It also offers guidance on challenging awards in different jurisdictions. Part I of the guide offers a comprehensive thematic overview to provide readers with a clear understanding of the intricacies involved in the arbitration process. Part II then explores the specifics of challenging and enforcing arbitration awards in 29 different jurisdictions. The Thailand chapter—which was authored by counsel Michael Ramirez, partner Noppramart Thammateeradaycho, and associate Anyamani Yimsaard—covers the following topics: Requirements for the form of arbitral awards; Recourse against an award; Setting aside; Recognition and enforcement of awards; Procedure for service of judicial and extrajudicial documents; Identification of assets; Enforcement proceedings; Interim measures; Attachment proceedings; and Recognition and enforcement against foreign states. The Thailand chapter can be downloaded through the button below, or visit the GAR website to explore the full guide.