Premise: Arbitral Institutions Can Do More To Further Legitimacy. True or False?

Have arbitral institutions been steady stewards of legitimacy in arbitration? Or, as more say, are they stagnant and protective of the status quo? In particular, can arbitration be legitimate if the arbitrator selection process is opaque, the quality of awards is variable, and the arbitral process lacks foresee ability? Particularly as the growth in regional institutions continues, are there consistent practices to be encouraged, and others to be eschewed, to promote and preserve legitimacy? This session will challenge whether institutions are doing enough to ensure the availability of diverse, well-trained arbitrators and to ensure first-rate, timely performance of their duties.

Chair: Salim Moollan (London)

 

Speakers:

• John Beechey (Paris)
• Brooks Daly (The Hague)
• Meg Kinnear (Washington, DC)
• Richard Naimark (New York)
• Sundra Rajoo (Kuala Lumpur)
• Mohamed Abdel Raouf (Cairo)
• Frederico José Straube (Sao Paulo)
• Adrian Winstanley (London)
• Nassib Ziadé (Bahrain)
  
   

Rapporteur: Belinda McRae (Paris)