Arbitration Bar of India will be a global trend setter: Attorney General R Venkataramani

The Arbitration Bar of India will be a global trendsetter, Attorney General for India (AG) R Venkataramani observed on Friday..The AG added that the world needs more such centres to advance the cause of arbitration. “Arbitration bar of India will be a trend setter for a global arbitration bar. The globe needs more such centres. I think it’s important for us to have a global arbitral bar. An organised bar at a global level can make a tremendous difference. India can lead the way," the AG said. .The AG was speaking on the theme, “Institutional Arbitration in India, What does the future hold?” at an event organised by law firm, JSA to welcome the leadership of International Court of Arbitration of the ICC.In his speech, the country’s top law officer also announced that a white paper on what India can offer to the global arbitration scenario is in the works and it is likely be published in February 2025. He highlighted the need for legal practitioners to have more discussions on how to advance it.“Hopefully we can in a couple of months time bringing forward a white paper on what India can do in a global arbitral scenario," he said. .The AG’s address was followed by a panel discussion. The panel was moderated by Amar Gupta, Partner, JSA and comprised Claudia Salomon, President of the ICC International Court of Arbitration (ICA); Senior Advocate Ritin Rai; Naresh Arora, VP, Legal Operations, ATC; and Swee Yen Koh, Senior Counsel and Partner, Wong Partnership..On being asked about ICC’s plans for India, Claudia Salomon said,"I can tell you that India is the absolute priority of ICC arbitration. Not only because of the size of your economy but because of cross border investment happening in Indian economy and the investments happening domestically as well.”She highlighted that ICC arbitration is the preferred choice for arbitration even when both the parties are Indian. ICC arbitration operates in around 120 cities in the world, she added. .Rai was asked about the recognition offered to institutional arbitration in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. "The Act as we see it today has no differential or special treatment for institutional arbitration. I think it’s universally recognised that there are many benefits to institutional arbitration. With institutional arbitration you have clarity on arbitrators, cost and time. With all this, it’s a bit perplexing as to why institutional arbitration doesn’t find more recognition in the Act," he said..The senior counsel noted that there are ‘legacy feelings’ in India when it came to institutional arbitrations being perceived as more expensive with less party autonomy when compared to ad-hoc arbitrations. Rai added that a draft bill finally released by the government in October recognises that institutions play a big role in arbitration and even proposes an amendment to recognise emergency arbitrations. Rai, however, noted that the draft bill needs more clarity on certain aspects especially on the proposed amendments to Section 9 of the Act, which recognises emergency arbitration. "Many of the proposals by the expert committee have not been taken into account. Changes have come into the draft bill, some good and some we need to be cautious about," he said. .Swee Yen Koh and Arora highlighted the advantages of institutional arbitration over ad-hoc arbitration and how it could benefit parties financially by giving a quicker resolution to their disputes. .Former Supreme Court judges, Justices (retd) AK Sikri, and Ajay Rastogi also spoke at the event.Justice Sikri commented on how Section 11 petitions (which call on the Court to appoint arbitrators) have become a norm in ad-hoc arbitrations as parties are unable to agree on an arbitral panel. "Very first problem of ad hoc arbitration is the constitution of tribunal takes time which contributes to delay," he said.He also noted that institutional arbitration is far better even when it comes to costs."In case of ad hoc arbitrations, although we may set down the procedure to follow, it would not be as exhaustive as institutional rules. There are checks and balances in institutional arbitrations," he added. .Justice Rastogi agreed that institutional arbitration appeared to be better than ad hoc arbitrations. “With the my experience as an arbitrator in one year, I find institutional arbitration is far superior and better," he said. However, he suggested that there should be a cap on the number of arbitrations an arbitrator can conduct at a given point in time to increase efficiency. Justice (retd) Rastogi also urged the government to have oversight committees to oversee the decisions taken by officials to settle the disputes instead of going to arbitration or litigation. .The event concluded with AG Venkataramani felicitating Salomon, the first woman to hold the office of President of the ICC International Court of Arbitration in its 100-year history.