Singapore’s experience underscores economic implications of strong legal foundations

(MENAFN) Earlier this month, Bahrain established the Bahrain International Commercial Court (BICC), reflecting the Gulf region’s rising ambitions in arbitration and cross-border dispute resolution. The new court notably introduces a distinctive transnational structure with the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), giving parties the option to have BICC appeals handled by the SICC’s International Committee.

Crucially, Bahrain aims to differentiate the BICC from other regional courts by anchoring its appeal structure to Singapore’s commercial legal reputation. Throughout 2025, Singapore’s continued ascent as a global hub for international dispute resolution has been driven by a series of judicial developments, reinforcing the significance of strong international mechanisms amid major rule-of-law regressions worldwide.

Bangladesh offers a particularly compelling recent example of the latter trend, where a deepening rule-of-law crisis has seen the current interim government pursue politicised legal actions against international investors, including Singaporean citizens. While Dhaka’s direction is eroding institutional trust and driving investors toward international tribunals, Singapore’s momentum underscores how establishing impartial, world-renowned legal systems creates a robust foundation for long-term economic development.

Singapore doubling down on judicial advances

In recent years, Singapore has secured a place in the global top tier of arbitration and dispute resolution centres at a speed few could emulate. Now standing alongside London as the world’s leading arbitration venue, the city-state has only accelerated its momentum over the past year. Major innovations at SIAC and the SICC, combined with a series of high-profile cases and partnerships, have strengthened Singapore’s position as a globally-trusted forum for resolving complex international disputes.

 Effective from 1 January 2025, SIAC’s revised arbitration rules have introduced a more progressive framework designed to sharpen efficiency, strengthen transparency and give parties clearer expectations on award timelines. The centre’s existing momentum shows why these reforms matter: SIAC’s latest annual report recorded a significant rise in international filings, with 93% of the 663 new cases involving foreign parties from a record 66 jurisdictions. SIAC’s expanding caseload from the UAE in particular reflects its broader efforts to build ties across the Gulf region.

In parallel, the SICC has been equally vital in elevating Singapore’s dispute resolution profile. Singapore announced in September that two new international judges will join the court in January 2026, strengthening the new International Committee that brings together SICC judges and their BICC counterparts. While the SICC’s International Committee was first created under Singapore’s bilateral treaty with Bahrain, the city-state now envisions using this structure to build similar arrangements with other jurisdictions.

This progress has not gone unnoticed. Last August, Singapore’s Ministry of Law and the World Bank Group’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) signed a Letter of Intent to establish ICSID’s first office outside its Washington, D.C. headquarters. The Singapore office will act as ICSID’s regional base, enabling it to administer cases, coordinate with regional partners and provide training across Asia-Pacific, cementing the country’s dispute resolution leadership in the Asia-Pacific and beyond.

Bangladesh’s concerning rule-of-law situation

If Singapore is setting the global standard, Bangladesh is now illustrating the opposite path, with the country plagued by political turmoil and rule-of-law degradation endangering its economic future. Dhaka's current crisis is rooted in the deposement of former Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, in August 2024 following the country's student-led protests and subsequent installation of the interim government led by Dr. Muhammad Yunus. 

Despite early promises of stable democracy and new elections scheduled for February 2026, initial optimism that the interim government might usher in a brighter future has given way to a wave of rule-of-law abuses. As BRAC University researcher Arafat Reza has rightly observed, there have been “no serious attempts” from the interim administration “to identify and address the challenges that have weakened the rule of law” in Bangladesh.

Instead, the interim Yunus government has only exacerbated issues with political interference and executive overreach, severely undermining the independence of the judiciary. Dhaka is persecuting a laundry list of former regime figures, with Hasina now sentenced to death in absentia after a highly controversial judicial process, and her Awami League party banned from political life ahead of February’s election. 

This crusade has extended to targeting leading business figures within Bangladesh’s financial-industrial core. Nowhere has this been more evident than in the government’s politically-motivated assault against the industrial conglomerate S Alam Group and its chairman, Mohammed Saiful Alam. Dhaka has accused Alam and other figures it perceives as associated with the Hasina administration of diverting billions of dollars out of the country. 

Authorities, under the direction of central bank governor Ahsan Mansur, have frozen S Alam family bank accounts, seized assets, carried out “spurious” investigations and “co-ordinated an incendiary media campaign,” targeting the family, according to the ICSID arbitration claim filed by S Alam’s lawyers. S Alam’s claim has been brought under the 2004 Bangladesh–Singapore bilateral investment treaty, given the family’s Singapore base and their acquisition of Singapore citizenship several years ago – a status Mohammed Saiful Alam deems a key protection against the Bangladeshi central bank’s “campaign of intimidation.” 

Tale of two economic journeys 

The S Alam case highlights both Singapore's crucial role in protecting investors as well as the Bangladeshi government’s lawless pursuit of vendetta politics, capitalising on the current vulnerability of its perceived opponents rather than implementing the deep systemic reforms needed to bolster the country's democratic foundations and drive lagging economic growth. 

Singapore’s political stability and dependable legal system – illustrated by consistently-strong performance in global corruption-control and rule-of-law indices – continue to underpin its exceptional pull for global capital. In 2025, the city-state retained its position as the world’s most attractive FDI destination for the fourth consecutive year, in addition to being deemed Asia-Pacific’s the top FDI confidence location in a Bloomberg Media report. 

Meanwhile, Bangladesh’s interim government is coming under mounting international pressure, with EU diplomats urging fair and legitimate elections in February and British lawmakers calling for a restoration of the rule of law, while the country continues to rank abysmally low in the WJP Rule of Law Index. Without a sharp change of course, Bangladesh will be unable to build the investor confidence and political stability needed to recover lost ground on its sustainable development goals.

Globally, internationally-integrated models of commercial justice are emerging as a defining marker of economic vitality – a reality that Bahrain’s recent shift makes clear and one that Singapore’s dispute resolution leadership has demonstrated even more decisively. Looking ahead, governments in countries like Bangladesh face the stark choice of fueling further instability and economic contraction, or building firm legal foundations to boost investor confidence and drive long-term sustainable development.

MENAFN29112025008232017513ID1110412313