REVISING THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES TO ADDRESS STATE ARBITRATIONS

This policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) proposes specific revisions to the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules to increase transparency and public participation in 'State arbitrations'. The authors argue that arbitrations involving a State as a party differ fundamentally from private commercial arbitrations because they implicate the public interest, public treasuries, and public policy issues.

• State arbitrations differ from private commercial arbitrations because they involve the public interest, as government actions affect nationals and residents, and awards of compensation can impact public treasuries. Furthermore, these cases often involve allegations of governmental misconduct or public policy issues that affect domestic decision-making.
• The current UNCITRAL Rules are criticized for lacking transparency in State arbitrations, often making it impossible for the public to know if a case has been filed, the arguments advanced, or the final decision. The authors argue this secrecy is inconsistent with UN commitments to human rights and good governance.
• The authors propose revising Article 32(5) to ensure that in disputes involving a State, any award or decision can be made public by either party without the other's consent, and that the tribunal president must send copies to the UNCITRAL secretariat for website publication.
• To address the lack of a public register, the brief proposes a new paragraph for Article 3 requiring the tribunal president to transmit the notice of arbitration and the agreement on the tribunal's composition to the UNCITRAL secretariat for public posting in State disputes.
• The brief suggests amending Article 25(4) to make open hearings the norm for State arbitrations, while maintaining 'in camera' hearings for private commercial disputes, subject to protections for confidential business information.
• The authors propose updating Article 15(3) to require that all documents received or issued by the tribunal in State disputes be sent to the UNCITRAL secretariat for public posting, arguing that access to pleadings is necessary for the functioning of amicus curiae submissions.
• The brief proposes a new Article 15(4) to explicitly allow tribunals to accept written submissions from non-disputing parties (amicus curiae), provided the submission assists the tribunal with a factual or legal issue and does not disrupt the proceedings.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2007). REVISING THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES TO ADDRESS STATE ARBITRATIONS. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/UNCITRAL_Arbitration_1Feb07.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. REVISING THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES TO ADDRESS STATE ARBITRATIONS. 2007. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/UNCITRAL_Arbitration_1Feb07.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=REVISING THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES TO ADDRESS STATE ARBITRATIONS |date=February 2007 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/UNCITRAL_Arbitration_1Feb07.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2007revising, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{REVISING THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES TO ADDRESS STATE ARBITRATIONS}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2007}, month = feb, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/UNCITRAL_Arbitration_1Feb07.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }