Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar emphasized the need for India to expand its presence in international commercial arbitration, stating that reliance solely on retired judges is insufficient. While acknowledging their expertise, he stressed the importance of including subject-matter specialists to strengthen the arbitration process. He also criticized excessive Article 136 interventions by the Supreme Court, arguing that what was meant to be a limited review mechanism is now disrupting the arbitral system.
Vice President of India, Jagdeep Dhankar, remarked on Saturday that while India’s rapid growth has positioned it as one of the most aspirational nations globally, the arbitration sector has not developed at a comparable pace.
He noted his experience with the ICC International Court of Arbitration, stating that India has yet to establish a significant presence in international arbitration compared to countries like Dubai and Singapore.
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar remarked that arbitration in India has become “merely an added burden to the conventional judicial hierarchy.”
He asserted,
“On self-assessment, without fear of contradiction, I can say we are nowhere… We are nowhere in the minds of people having commercial relationships with us if it is international commercial arbitration.”
To enhance the credibility of arbitration in India, he emphasized the need to address the control exerted by certain arbitrators, which he believes stems from the judiciary.
He stated,
“There is, I am saying it with utmost restraint, absolute tight fist control of a segment of a category that is involved with arbitral process determination… It is excruciatingly painful.”
Dhankar acknowledged that while retired judges contribute positively to the arbitration process, there is a pressing need to include experts from relevant fields.
He suggested,
“Time for us to navigate from step by step from alternative resolution to amicable resolution. Let us convert it from dispute to difference resolution.”
Emphasizing the need to include domain experts in arbitration, Dhankar remarked,
“A former Chief Justice of this country made an observation: ‘The process has become an old boys’ club.'”
He was referring to the involvement of retired judges in arbitration.
He clarified,
“I should not be misunderstood even for a moment. Retired judges of this country are assets to the arbitral process. They lend credibility to us. I know some of the former chief justices and judges who are highly appreciated globally for international commercial arbitration. However, there are areas where the arbitral tribunal needs to be supplemented by experts in fields such as oceanography, aviation, and infrastructure.”
Discussing the implications of Article 136 on arbitration, Dhankar stated,
“The Attorney General of the country can really reflect and make a big change. Which country in the world, Attorney, can you tell me, has suo moto cognizance by the highest court? I’m sure I can’t look around. Article 136 intervention was intended to be a narrow slit, but that wall has been demolished, encompassing anything and everything under the sun, including the responsibilities of magistrates, Session Judges, District Judges, and High Court Judges. This demolition is also detrimental to the arbitral process.”
He concluded with a call to action, saying,
“All I am suggesting, in all humility and as a concerned citizen of this country, is that the issue you are debating is critical to micro and small industries. They want a facile, easy arbitral process.”
Speaking at the inaugural session of the colloquium on “International Arbitration: Indian Perspective” organized by the India International Arbitration Centre.
He concluded,
“If any country needs a smooth judicial process, it is India… Now is the time to emerge as a global dispute resolution centre.”
He criticized the current arbitral process in India as merely an additional burden within the traditional adjudication framework.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
