Former CJI DY Chandrachud calls for an arbitration revolution in India, urging institutions to embrace diversity, appoint women arbitrators, and adopt technology for efficient, modern dispute resolution.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud recently addressed a session during India ADR Week 2025, emphasizing the critical role of arbitral institutions in promoting diversity, inclusion, and technological adoption in dispute resolution.
Speaking at a session organized by the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration (MCIA) and hosted by AZB & Partners, Justice Chandrachud noted that institutional arbitration is not just a substitute for courts but a system that captures the strengths of the judicial framework.
“Institutional arbitration is desirable not just because it substitutes courts, but because it picks up the positives of the court system – infrastructure, accountability, and an institutional approach to adjudication. At the same time, it relieves courts of their crushing burdens and avoids the lack of accountability in ad-hoc arbitration,”
he said.
Justice Chandrachud highlighted the Singapore International Arbitration Centre Rules 2025 (SIAC Rules 2025) as a model for India’s arbitral institutions. Enacted in January, these rules offer a forward-looking approach that combines efficiency, transparency, and inclusivity.
“These rules will serve as paradigms not just for SIAC but also for institutions in the Global South, providing lessons that can reshape India’s arbitral landscape,”
he remarked.
The session, titled “SIAC Rules 2025: Redefining ‘I’ – India, Inclusion and Innovation”, was moderated by Vijayendra Pratap Singh (Senior Partner & Head – Litigation, AZB & Partners) and featured a distinguished panel including Gaurav Khanna (Nestlé India), Professor Lawrence Boo (National University of Singapore), Urvashi S Pathak (Max Life Insurance), and Vivekananda Neelakantan (SIA).
Justice Chandrachud stressed that DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) must be central to arbitration frameworks. He humorously noted:
“It’s DEI, not DIE, as the Trumpian world puts it.”
Drawing from his judicial experience, he shared how he actively appointed women arbitrators in international commercial disputes, observing that they brought responsibility and vision beyond professional obligations.
“I made it a point to appoint women lawyers as arbitrators. They responded with a tremendous sense of responsibility, not just treating this as a professional brief but as a way to transform the system,”
he said.
He also highlighted the changing demographics in the legal profession: over 50% of entrants in national law schools are women, and in several Hindi-belt states, women account for over 70% of new judicial recruits. Justice Chandrachud emphasized the importance of mentorship and institutional support to ensure women remain visible in leadership roles despite family responsibilities.
Justice Chandrachud called for technology adoption in institutional arbitration, citing the judiciary’s digital transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic as a successful example. He suggested tools such as:
- AI-powered case management
- Predictive analytics
- Virtual hearings
- Digitization of records
“Institutional mechanisms can ensure AI-powered case management, predictive analytics, virtual hearings and digitisation of records, areas where ad-hoc arbitration would struggle,”
he noted.
