Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru on Monday called for more diversity of arbitrators in international arbitration.

During a fireside chat with Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi at the Bengaluru leg of the India ADR Week 2026, hosted by Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration (MCIA), Justice Bakhru was asked whether India needed separate legislation to govern international arbitration. The judge said,

“Well, personally I don't think we require multiple Acts…if you have very frequent amendments, if you have very frequent changes in the statutory structure, possibly the results may be amplified.”

Responding to a question on the differences between international arbitration and arbitration in the Global South, he said,

“What is the aspiration of the country as far as arbitration is concerned? Well, one of the standing issues is about diversity. You need to have more brown in international arbitration than there is in the Global South. It's possible that that doesn't require an enactment.”

Justice Bakhru also called for more scrutiny and quality control in arbitration. He said,

“I've always been a firm advocate that we do require QCs in arbitration laws. I think more than 50% of the issues that arise in Section 34 would challenge the arbitration law, would not arise if it had a four-eye check, just as all firms do that, before you turn on the document and give it to anybody else.”

In her speech, Karnataka High Court Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju spoke on the next phase of reform of the Arbitration Act. She said that it should focus less on adding isolated provisions and more on designing arbitration as a coherent statutory system.

“The statute must address the precise points at which arbitration loses time and legitimacy. Jurisdiction appointments, internal protection, procedural objections, extensions of pleas and so on.”

On judicial interference in arbitral awards and delays in the process, she said,

“The discipline at the appellate stage is of larger concern. Arbitration cannot be efficient if delay is merely shifting from the tribunal to the court or from the court back to the tribunal. The law must, therefore, address this as a system-wide problem and not as a problem of arbitral timelines alone.”

Also part of the event was a panel discussion on the topic AI, Algorithms and Access: Technology’s Impact on Diversity in Dispute Resolution. The panel was moderated by JSA Partner Probir Roy Chowdhury and featured Senior Advocate CK Nandakumar, Rajah & Tann Partner Paras Lalwani and Inmobi Vice President, Legal Pooja Yedukumar.

The first question posed to the panelists was: could AI actually create a new divide between parties and equal access to sophisticated AI tools and data?

Nandakumar responded,

“The first thing I think you must understand and probably accept is that arbitration is not necessarily about access to justice. Arbitration is about dispute resolution. I think certainly AI can aid equal treatment because it gives everybody a shot at it.” 

Lalwani had a contrary view, saying,

“AI does end up exacerbating the divide between the big party and the small party. Because not everyone has access to enterprise-grade tools…And what also ends up happening sometimes is that the larger party uses advanced AI tools to generate output that the other side just can't challenge.”

They also spoke on how large law firms with resources to develop their own AI tools will overshadow smaller law firms that use less premium versions of AI tools.

On the impact AI will have on the training of our juniors and the sustainability of firms, Nandakumar said,

“You can use AI. Please use it. But that's not at the cost of your hard work...You can't delegate document reading to AI. You can't delegate drafting altogether to AI…if you don't make it a habit of reading, of applying your mind, of challenging yourself, you will simply become irrelevant.”

The event also saw a debate on the topic This House Believes that Repeat Appointments Are More a Threat Than a Badge of Excellence featuring Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa, Argus Partner Bhavya Mohan, Kochhar & Co Partner Meena Venugopal and Advocate Poornima Hatti. The debate was moderated by RPC Partner Ankit Goyal and judged by Senior Advocate Harish Narasappa.