The rapid growth of online alcohol sales, delivery services, and digital marketing has increased alcohol availability and heightened public health concerns, particularly among adolescents. However, regulatory responses remain inconsistent and vary significantly across regions. This scoping review synthesizes global regulatory approaches to online alcohol access, encompassing both established Western models and emerging Asian frameworks, and identifies key cross-national patterns and policy gaps. This scoping review followed PRISMA-ScR (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews) and Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Searches of four electronic databases were complemented by a supplementary gray literature search targeting specific Asian jurisdictions to minimize geographic bias. The identified sources included policies and peer-reviewed studies on online alcohol sales, delivery practices, age-verification procedures, and digital marketing regulations. Data were systematically organized by regulatory domain and analyzed using a comparative socio-political framework (liberalism vs. paternalism) to interpret cross-national differences. The analysis of 34 documents across five regulatory domains revealed a distinct global divide. Western nations predominantly rely on co-regulatory models that frequently suffer from significant enforcement gaps, whereas Asian jurisdictions employ strict structural barriers. These include mandatory digital real-name authentication, "Smart Order" systems, and joint platform liability, designed to effectively restrict underage access where Western self-regulation has historically failed. To address global enforcement gaps, future policies must evolve from "soft" co-regulation to "hard" technical mandates. Integrating Asian-style digital identity systems with strict platform liability offers a viable pathway to effectively restrict underage access and reduce alcohol-related harm.

Despite the formal recognition of international water law principles, Central Asian states have not effectively incorporated these norms into enforceable domestic regulations governing the Amu Darya and Syr Darya basins. This study aims to examine the extent to which international legal standards governing transboundary water management are incorporated into domestic regulatory regimes and to evaluate the capacity of existing legal frameworks to address emerging cross border risks related to water allocation and hydrotechnical safety. The research employs a doctrinal and comparative legal approach by interpreting treaty obligations and systematically analysing national legislation and institutional arrangements in selected Central Asian jurisdictions. The findings identify three principal issues. First, states formally recognise the principle of equitable utilisation but fail to establish precise allocation rules and effective enforcement mechanisms. Second, national authorities regulate hydrotechnical safety primarily within domestic legal systems without developing binding cross border supervision mechanisms. Third, fragmented institutional mandates weaken coordinated compliance with transboundary obligations. The study concludes that institutional fragmentation rather than normative scarcity constitutes the principal regulatory challenge, and that sustainable regional water governance requires integrated basin level institutions, harmonised safety standards, and enforceable cooperative mechanisms among riparian states.

This study introduces a novel conceptual model, "Dual Participatory Procedural Justice," as a theoretical legal framework for implementing the "Divide and Choose" principle in bilateral divisible disputes in private law, addressing contemporary challenges in civil and commercial dispute resolution. This system diverges from the mathematical idealism of Western theory and the fragmented applications of traditional Islamic jurisprudence by integrating the procedural precision of Game Theory with Islamic legal maxims, especially the principles of preventing harm and alleviating hardship. Employing a critical comparative methodology grounded in Natural Law jurisprudence, the study challenges the prevailing notion of symmetry in Western models and contextualises the mechanism within the historical operational frameworks of Islamic courts. The resulting framework establishes enforceable safeguards, including mandates for functional symmetry and expert intervention. The study primarily focuses on situating the proposal within the framework of UAE Civil Procedure Law and constitutional Sharia principles, while offering a comparative analysis of its applicability in Southeast Asian jurisdictions, particularly highlighting parallels with the Indonesian Musyawarah and Malaysian Sulh systems. The model is only for disputes that can be split into two and does not cover issues of child custody or public policy (ordre public). The results show that this participatory approach significantly reduces court backlogs and makes people in Arab and Southeast Asian countries happier with the law.

Abstract Legal research in Indonesia and Malaysia continues to evolve amid growing demands for methodological transparency and analytical rigor. However, the dominance of doctrinal approaches has limited the adoption of empirical and mixed methods in regional legal scholarship. This study aims to examine the implementation of data analysis methods in Scopus-indexed law journals from both countries between 2019 and 2024. Using a comparative qualitative approach supported by content analysis, 60 research articles were systematically reviewed from four selected journals. The findings reveal that qualitative methods remain predominant (78 %), while mixed methods are emerging gradually, especially in Malaysian publications. Quantitative techniques are used minimally (3 %), indicating persistent reliance on document-based normative research. Differences between Indonesia and Malaysia are influenced by academic traditions, legal education systems, and editorial policies. This study is original in mapping the methodological patterns of legal research in two Southeast Asian jurisdictions through an empirical review of Scopus-indexed publications. The results contribute to the enhancement of methodological literacy and highlight the need for integrating normative and empirical approaches in legal studies. Strengthening mixed-method applications is essential to advancing evidence-based legal scholarship and aligning Indonesian and Malaysian legal research with global academic standards.

Much of the literature on drug-related violence focuses on the Americas, its applicability to other regions of the world unobvious (Liem and Moeller, 2025). Focusing on the death penalty for drug offences in Indonesia - with findings generalisable to other Southeast Asian jurisdictions - we find that, while contemporary theories focus on the violence within drug markets, here the violence is unidirectional: from the state to civilians. We apply a necropolitical theoretical framework (Mbembe, 2003) to data from interviews and focus groups with high level judges (8 participants), prosecutors (32), narcotics police (8) and other police officers (6) in Jakarta, Indonesia from 2023 to 2024. Our data reveal three key features of the necropolitical theoretical framework: 1). State of exception and siege: our participants harnessed the language of a 'drugs emergency' in Indonesia, with concerns about invasion, a foreign 'insurgency' of drugs, justifying the most punitive criminal justice response. 2). Annihilation for preservation: judicial and extrajudicial executions of drug traffickers are justified for the protection of current and future generations from the scourge of drugs. 3). Racism in post-colonial practice: executions for drug offences have been disproportionately directed at foreign nationals. This paper invites the reader to zoom out from the typical focus on violence within the drug trade to consider punishment - judicial and extrajudicial - as a form of state-sponsored, necropolitical violence, part of the continuum of 'drug-related violence' rather than simply a matter of penal policy.

The Market Stall Pharmaceutical Business Policy under Minister of Health Regulation No. 11 of 2025 represents a deregulation measure that expands the retail distribution of over the counter medicines beyond formal pharmaceutical service facilities. While intended to enhance public access to medicines, particularly in underserved areas, this policy raises fundamental legal concerns regarding regulatory coherence, supervisory design, and the scope of state responsibility in safeguarding consumer safety. This study examines the policy from the perspective of health administrative law and consumer protection, emphasizing the precautionary principle, state responsibility, and state liability as normative benchmarks. Employing a doctrinal legal method with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, the research also reviews supervisory models for over-the-counter medicines in selected Asian jurisdictions. The findings reveal three critical regulatory gaps: vertical inconsistency between deregulation norms and higher health legislation; horizontal fragmentation in inter agency supervision; and the absence of explicit state liability mechanisms in cases of consumer harm. These deficiencies extend beyond administrative technicalities and pose risks of maladministration, potentially undermining the constitutional right to health. The study argues that deregulation in the health sector cannot be construed as a reduction of state obligations. Rather, the state remains the ultimate guarantor of public safety and must ensure integrated, risk-based, and accountable supervision to prevent regulatory failure and to uphold consumer protection within the framework of the rule of law.

Abstract This study employs latent profile analysis of TIMSS 2023 data to examine secondary school students’ motivation toward mathematics (i.e., confidence, interest, and value) in Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand. The analysis is guided by three research questions: (1) identifying the characteristics of motivation profiles in the Asia-Pacific jurisdictions; (2) exploring their associations with mathematics achievement and gender; and (3) comparing these findings across the Asia-Pacific jurisdictions. The findings revealed both consistent and inconsistent motivation profiles. The value-oriented inconsistent profile was prevalent in the Asian jurisdictions, whereas it was observed among a small proportion of students in the Western-influenced Pacific jurisdictions. Motivation generally showed positive associations with mathematics performance. More specifically, confidence was more closely linked to achievement in the Western-influenced Pacific jurisdictions; however, in the Asian jurisdictions, value and interest appeared to compensate for low confidence in predicting mathematics scores. Gender distribution also differed across cultural contexts: boys in the Western-influenced Pacific regions were overrepresented in adaptive motivation profiles, while in the Asian jurisdictions, this overrepresentation extended to profiles with maladaptive characteristics. These divergent effects may be attributed to philosophical differences between collectivism and individualism, which tend to characterize Asian and Western-influenced Pacific societies, respectively. The study provides evidence that assumptions about achievement motivation, derived from Western studies, are not universally applicable.

The legal protection of guarantors declared bankrupt or suspended from debt payment obligations (PKPU), together with the principal debtor, remains a critical yet underexplored issue in Indonesian insolvency law. This study examines the scope and adequacy of such protections under contemporary Islamic economic law, providing comparative insights from selected common law and Asian jurisdictions. Employing a normative juridical approach combined with comparative legal analysis, the research analyses statutory provisions, judicial precedents, and doctrinal interpretations. The study highlights the imbalance of liability between guarantors and debtors, the absence of explicit safeguards under Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and PKPU, and the resulting implications for creditor rights and economic justice. Comparative analysis draws from the United Kingdom and United States (standard law systems) and Singapore, Japan, and Malaysia (Asian jurisdictions), revealing more structured protections for guarantors, including mechanisms such as independent liability, automatic stay, and negotiated debt restructuring. The findings indicate that Indonesia's current framework inadequately recognises the secondary and derivative nature of guarantor obligations, exposing them to disproportionate risk. This study contributes to the academic discourse by integrating contemporary Islamic economic principles into the analysis of insolvency law, providing a normative framework for reform and offering comparative insights that can inform both legislation and future research on guarantor protection. The study recommends legislative reform to explicitly regulate guarantor protection, integrating principles of proportionality, good faith, and balanced creditor–debtor relations, in line with contemporary Islamic economic law.

With the fast development of artificial intelligence, the creative industries were changing, as machines can produce highly developed works of art that question the conventional concept of creativity, authorship, and property rights. With the rising popularity of AI-generated art, the intellectual property (IP) law and policy concerning AI-generated art have become a pressing legal and policy concern. This paper explores the intellectual basis of AI-created pieces of art, emphasizing the role of human elements and machine-directed algorithms leading to the overall artistic work. It then makes an assessment of the existing intellectual property rights systems such as copyright, patents, trademarks and moral rights to see how they apply to AI-assisted and fully autonomous works. The legal issues in the center are examined, and specific focus is made on the questions of authorship attribution, allocating ownership and copyright deserving, and liability of developers, users and AI systems in cases of infringement. Comparative analysis of approaches in the world has shown that there is a great variance that exists among the jurisdictions. The United States tends to use a model of authorship that is more human-focused, restricting the copyright rights of the work that does not imply significant human contribution. The European Union gives the priority to human intellectual creative but is seeking alternative regulation solutions. Asian jurisdictions including Japan, China and India are actively evolving guidelines to find a balance between innovation and legal certainty with each having its own policy orientation. International organizations specifically WIPO are trying to make global standards harmonize despite different national interpretations.

We examine how shadow education is associated with educational inequality and mathematics achievement in six top-performing East Asian jurisdictions: Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Japan, Macao, Singapore, and South Korea. Using multilevel logistic and linear modelling on 2022 PISA data, we analyse the prevalence, socioeconomic stratification, and differential effects of five tutoring modes: one-to-one, internet/computer-based, asynchronous video instruction, small-group, and large-group tutoring. Access to traditional tutoring remains highly SES-dependent, whereas internet- or computer-based tutoring are the most democratised. Asynchronous video instruction appears particularly effective in Singapore, potentially due to high-quality English-language digital resources. Group-based tutoring is positively associated with mathematics in South Korea and Chinese Taipei, while one-to-one tutoring is generally linked to lower outcomes, suggesting a remedial role. We conclude that the role of shadow education modalities differs by jurisdiction. We discuss how shadow education reproduces inequality and recommend that future studies assess students’ use of AI for academic support.

Indonesia’s drug policy, as codified in Law No. 35 of 2009 and Law No. 1 of 2023 Penal Code (KUHP), remains largely punitive, emphasizing long-term imprisonment and capital punishment, even for low-level drug offenders. Although Articles 54 and 127 provide for rehabilitation, their implementation is inconsistent and heavily reliant on law enforcement discretion, contributing to chronic prison overcrowding without effectively reducing drug circulation. This article examines Indonesia’s drug sentencing framework from three perspectives: (1) a normative legal analysis of statutory provisions and judicial practices; (2) a comparative study of Southeast Asian jurisdictions such as Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam, which are increasingly adopting rehabilitative and decriminalisation approaches; and (3) a restorative justice perspective, assessing alignment with principles of proportionality, reintegration, and human dignity. The findings reveal that Indonesia’s criminal justice system still prioritises retributive over health-oriented and rights-based models. While diversion mechanisms exist, they remain underutilised. In contrast, neighbouring countries have introduced significant reforms: Malaysia has abolished mandatory death penalties, Thailand has decriminalised minor drug use, and Singapore has expanded diversion programmes. This article advocates for comprehensive legal reform to integrate restorative justice principles, enhance judicial diversion, expand non-custodial alternatives, and align drug policy with international human rights and public health standards.

Generative artificial intelligence has brought challenges to traditional copyright frameworks. These frameworks have long required human authorship as a key condition for protection. This paper focuses on how different jurisdictions deal with copyright protection for AI-generated works that involve little human input. It analyzes recent court decisions and new policy developments in three major regions: the United States, the European Union, and some selected Asian jurisdictions. Through this analysis, the paper identifies emerging patterns in legal practices. Most jurisdictions still keep the human authorship requirement. They refuse to give copyright protection to works created purely by AI systems. However, there are significant differences between these regions. These differences mainly lie in how they treat works made through human-AI collaboration and how they allocate copyright rights for such works. The paper concludes that policymakers now face an urgent challenge. They need to establish clear guidelines to define the minimum level of human contribution required for copyright protection. At the same time, these guidelines must balance three aspects: encouraging technological innovation, protecting the rights of human creators, and keeping consistency with existing copyright principles.

Abstract Under the migration of the proportionality doctrine to Asia, the dialogue and interaction between public law and private law have deepened and become more fruitful. The proportionality doctrine, usually accompanied by a general human-rights-limitation clause in the constitution, has made human rights reasoning come into the making of private law more directly and extensively. The proportionality principle also equips the judiciary with an analytical tool to assess the constitutionality of the state’s law or actions that limit the constitutional rights of involved parties. This Article discusses the dialogue between public law and private law under the migration of the proportionality doctrine to several Asian jurisdictions, with a focus on Vietnam. The dialogue can be identified in three aspects: (i) dialogue as the impact of public law on private law; (ii) dialogue as the interaction between public law and private law; (iii) dialogue as the politico-legal interaction between lawmakers and courts. Among Asian jurisdictions, the Vietnamese legal system has arguably witnessed an inadvertent migration of the proportionality doctrine, and therefore provoking interesting and useful debates on the effect of constitutional rights in private law in both theoretical and practical aspects.

Custodial violence represents one of the gravest violations of human rights, striking at the core of human dignity, personal liberty, and the rule of law. Despite the existence of comprehensive international human rights standards prohibiting torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, custodial abuse continues to persist across South Asian jurisdictions. This article undertakes a comparative study of custodial violence in India and selects South Asian countries, namely Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, through the lens of international human rights obligations. It examines the extent to which global norms enshrined in instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention Against Torture, and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) have been incorporated into domestic legal frameworks and institutional practices. The study critically analyses constitutional safeguards, statutory provisions, judicial interventions, and accountability mechanisms governing custodial conduct in these jurisdictions. It highlights significant gaps between normative commitments and practical enforcement, underscoring challenges such as weak institutional oversight, political interference, limited access to justice, and entrenched cultures of impunity within law enforcement agencies. By adopting a comparative and human-rights-based approach, the article identifies best practices and structural deficiencies in the region’s response to custodial violence. The study concludes that effective prevention of custodial abuse requires not only legal reform but also sustained institutional accountability, independent monitoring, and adherence to international human rights standards to ensure meaningful protection of detainees’ rights in South Asia.

This article examines the regulatory approaches to platform work in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Our analysis explores a critical socio-legal gap in labour law scholarship by providing a comprehensive comparative overview of the platform labour regulations across these three major South Asian economies. It reveals divergence in practices and approaches within the South Asian region, characterised predominantly by laissez-faire , soft law, and deregulatory frameworks. We also demonstrate how the platform economy has accentuated and exacerbated pre-existing informality throughout South Asia, which is grounded in the understanding that insufficient regulatory oversight perpetuates this informality in the labour markets even more. Meanwhile, the recently adopted EU Directive 2024/2831 on improving working conditions in platform work (PWD) has emerged as a global benchmark for platform regulation. Our analysis examines three key areas of the PWD, namely, the presumption of employment, algorithmic management oversight, and collective rights safeguards across South Asian jurisdictions. We find that the existing regulatory framework in the region largely does not incorporate these regulatory aspects and provisions due to structural and institutional constraints, compounded by a deregulatory orientation. Therefore, we examine recent ILO platform standard-setting to evaluate its potential impact on South Asian jurisdictions, with the aim of transposing these principles through an international labour standard. We contend that the ILO standards might provide a promising framework for regulating platform work in these contexts only if it clearly reiterates the right of platform workers.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to legal mechanisms such as arbitration, mediation, and negotiation that resolve disputes outside of the traditional court system. The main objective of this research is to evaluate the current state of ADR in Bangladesh and propose specific reforms to make ADR more accessible, credible, and effective. This includes advocating for the development of a unified legal framework, the institutionalization of ADR procedures, and the professionalization of mediators and arbitrators. The study also aims to assess whether ADR offers equal justice for all parties—particularly disadvantaged groups—and how public trust and court endorsement can enhance ADR usage in resolving civil and some criminal matters. To achieve these objectives, the study adopts a qualitative research methodology based on doctrinal legal analysis and comparative evaluation. It examines primary sources such as legislation, policy documents, and judicial practices, as well as secondary sources including legal literature, academic commentary, and reports by NGOs and international organizations. Insights are also drawn from ADR models in other South Asian jurisdictions to identify best practices that could be adapted to the Bangladeshi context. The findings suggest that a properly structured and enforced ADR system, supported by trained professionals and public awareness, can reduce the burden on courts and deliver timely and equitable justice.

Extracellular vesicle (EV)-based therapies have attracted considerable attention as a novel class of biologics with broad clinical potential. However, their clinical translation is impeded by the fragmented and rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, with significant disparities between the United States, European Union, and key Asian jurisdictions. In this review, we systematically analyze regional guidelines and strategic frameworks governing EV therapeutics, emphasizing critical hurdles in quality control, safety evaluation, and efficacy demonstration. We further explore the implications of EVs' heterogeneity on product characterization and the emerging direct-to-consumer market for EVs and secretome preparations. Drawing on these insights, in this review, we aim to provide a roadmap for harmonizing regulatory requirements, advancing standardized analytical approaches, and fostering ongoing collaboration among regulatory authorities, industry stakeholders, and academic investigators. Such coordinated efforts are essential to safeguard patient welfare, ensure product consistency, and accelerate the responsible integration of EV-based interventions into clinical practice.

This article makes a comparative analysis of how Pakistan and Singapore manage to navigate in the legal ambit of pluralism within the dual framework of a centralized, common law-based legal system. Pakistan is a deeply-rooted, socially sedimented pluralism formed by Islamic law, ethnicity and informal justice. In contrast, Singapore controls limited pluralism through a technocratic system and highly centralized legal system. By studying both reforms and law-making, the article brings up institutional and ideological distinctions, ranging from the legal disorganization of Pakistan to the naturalization of legitimacy issues in Singapore. It analyzes how, properly handled, legal pluralism has the potential to promote legal innovation, strengthen state legitimacy and promote inclusivity in governance in postcolonial societies.

Abstract This Introduction summarizes the theme of the twelve essays published in the symposium issue of “Past, Present, and Future of Law and Economics in Asia” at the Asian Journal of Law and Economics. Asian jurisdictions are at different economic developmental stages, and my observation is that the development of Law & Economics somewhat tracks the economic performance of the jurisdictions. Asian jurisdictions face common hurdles in spreading the use of Law & Economics.

ensure greater labor rights protection.