ICCA Madrid 2026: Congress Day Three Round-Up

This post reports on the topics discussed during the panels held on the last day of ICCA Madrid 2026, the 27^th ICCA Congress held from 12 to 15 April, addressing the theme International Arbitration: Local, Global or Both?

Procedural Integrity and Legitimacy: Building Confidence Across Jurisdictions

The last day of the ICCA Madrid 2026 Congress opened with a timely and thought‑provoking question concerning the role of procedural integrity in strengthening the legitimacy of international arbitration across jurisdictions. The panel moderated by Eva Chan (Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP / Young ICCA) and Gourab Banerji (Arbitrator and Senior Advocate) brought together a diverse group of speakers including Prof. Georges Affaki (Justice of the QIC, Professor, and Arbitrator), Diego P. Fernández Arroyo (SciencesPo Law School / Independent Arbitrator), Wilson Mwihuri (Dentons Hamilton Harrison & Mathews), and Fabio Nunez del Prado (Rebaza, Alcázar & de las Casas). The discussion focused on how procedural integrity shapes confidence in arbitration across jurisdictions. The moderators skilfully guided the discussion through both conceptual and practical dimensions of the topic. From the outset, the panel made it clear that legitimacy is not an abstract or purely theoretical concept, but rather a practical concern that directly affects how arbitration is conducted, perceived, and ultimately accepted by its users.

Affaki opened with a conceptual framing of legitimacy as a process through which arbitration moves from party consent to the final award. Within this framework, procedural integrity was identified as the central condition for legitimacy. Where proceedings are conducted in a manner that is consistent, intelligible, and fair, arbitration is more likely to command acceptance. Conversely, where procedural integrity is perceived to be lacking, scepticism increases and confidence in the system is undermined.

While there was broad agreement on core principles such as the right to be heard, equality of arms, and reasoned decision-making, the discussion quickly turned to the challenges of implementation. Fernandez Arroyo highlighted the tension between excessive formalism and excessive flexibility, warning that both extremes may ultimately damage legitimacy. In particular, concerns were raised about procedural excess, which may increase costs and enable strategic behaviour, especially by parties with greater resources.

A recurring theme throughout the panel was the central role of perception. Legitimacy was described not only as a matter of objective fairness, but also as a function of how arbitration is viewed by parties, states, and other stakeholders. In this context, the contrast between investment and commercial arbitration was critically examined. While investment arbitration has faced sustained scrutiny, commercial arbitration has largely remained shielded from public debate. However, the panel suggested that this distinction may be misleading, as commercial arbitration also plays a significant role in shaping transnational economic governance.

Mwihuri further explored the evolution of arbitral practice, particularly in relation to due process and the phenomenon of “due process paranoia.” While tribunals have traditionally exercised caution in managing proceedings, there is a growing shift toward more proactive case management, driven by user expectations and efficiency concerns. The challenge lies in ensuring that increased efficiency does not come at the expense of procedural fairness.

Closely linked to this issue was the role of arbitrators. Nunez del Prado examined whether arbitrators should act as passive decision-makers or adopt a more active role in the proceedings. While there was support for a more engaged approach, speakers emphasized that legitimacy ultimately depends on how arbitral powers are exercised, particularly in terms of transparency, neutrality, and respect for equality between the parties.

Transparency also featured prominently in the discussion. While investment arbitration has moved toward greater openness, commercial arbitration continues to rely on confidentiality, albeit with increasing pressure for disclosure in certain contexts. The panel emphasized that transparency should not be treated as an absolute value, but rather calibrated depending on the nature of the dispute and the interests at stake.

Finally, the panel addressed questions of accountability and arbitrator appointments. While acknowledging concerns regarding bias and structural incentives within the party-appointment system, Del Prado noted that it remains a cornerstone of arbitration due to its connection with party autonomy and trust in the process. At the same time, the discussion underscored that accountability mechanisms must be carefully balanced to avoid undermining the independence and finality that define arbitration.

The panel finished with a poll which asked the public what the single greatest challenge to arbitration’s legitimacy is. The most voted answer was lack of public understanding of arbitration, followed by perceived arbitrator bias/lack of diversity, lack of transparency, inconsistent court support or interference and cultural/legal misalignment with local systems.

Overall, the panel highlighted that legitimacy in arbitration is continuously constructed through practice. Procedural integrity remains at the core of this process, not only as a set of formal guarantees, but as a lived reality that shapes both outcomes and perceptions across jurisdictions.

Closing Session

At the Closing Session of the Congress, keeping true to its theme “International Arbitration: Local, Global or Both?” Prof. Dr. Teresa Rodriguez de las Heras Ballel (European Law Institute) delivered the keynote address on the topic “Redefining Global-Local Dynamics in Arbitration: Convergence, Divergence, or AI-Human Hybridisation.” She examined the growing impact of artificial intelligence on arbitration and its implications for the balance between global convergence and local divergence.

Rodríguez framed the discussion as a fundamental dilemma: whether arbitration should remain an inherently human activity or evolve into a hybrid model in which AI plays a central role. She emphasized that AI is no longer limited to assisting tasks, but is increasingly influencing how evidence is processed and how decisions are structured, raising important questions about the future of arbitral decision-making.

She noted that this evolution is already reflected in emerging regulatory and institutional frameworks, which implicitly accept the use of AI while attempting to define its limits. Against this backdrop, she explored the tension between convergence and divergence, highlighting that different jurisdictions are developing distinct approaches to AI governance, while at the same time there is potential for alignment around core principles such as transparency and human oversight.

The intervention also addressed the risk that AI may standardise legal reasoning by reinforcing dominant interpretations, potentially reducing diversity in outcomes. While this may increase predictability, it may also undermine the case-specific analysis traditionally associated with arbitration.

Finally, Rodríguez highlighted the challenges AI poses for accountability, particularly in relation to independence and responsibility in decision-making, as well as its broader systemic implications. While AI may enhance efficiency and access to justice, it may also create new inequalities linked to technological access. She concluded by noting that arbitration stands at a critical juncture, where the key challenge is to balance innovation with the preservation of the principles that underpin its legitimacy.

During their closing remarks the ICCA Programme Committee Co-chairs Samaa Haridi (King & Spalding LLP), Prof. Vladimir Pavić (University of Belgrade), and Tom Sikora (Exxon Mobil Corporation) congratulated the Madrid Host Committee for their successful organization of the ICCA 2026 Madrid Congress and current ICCA President Dr. Stanimir Alexandrov welcomed Audley Sheppard KC as the newly elected ICCA President-Elect to succeed  him.

The Session ended with a presentation on the ICCA 2028 San Francisco Congress to be held from 7 to 10 May 2028, hosted by AAA-ICDR and CalArb.

Follow along and see all of Kluwer Arbitration Blog’s coverage of ICCA Madrid 2026 here.