Seeking to give “new impetus” to institutional arbitration and reduce court intervention in such cases, the government introduced a bill seeking views on the proposed amendments.

The Department of Legal Affairs of the Ministry of Justice has invited comments on the Draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, stating that “the aim and purpose is to give further impetus to arbitration institutional, to reduce the intervention of the courts in arbitrations and to ensure a rapid conclusion of arbitration proceedings.

The bill comes months after an expert committee headed by former law secretary and former Lok Sabha secretary general TK Vishwanathan submitted its report on proposed reforms in the arbitration sector to the ministry of Justice.

The bill proposes the concept of “emergency arbitration”.

The proposed amendment indicates that arbitral institutions may, for the purposes of granting interim measures, provide for the appointment of an “emergency arbitrator” before the constitution of an arbitral tribunal.

The appointed emergency arbitrator will conduct the proceedings in the manner specified by the (arbitration) council.

At the same time, the bill also omits some clauses from the current law.

One of the omitted clauses relates to the tabling of proposed notifications in both Houses of Parliament when they are in session.

The omitted clause read: “A copy of each notification proposed to be issued… Shall be laid in draft form before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of 30 days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiration of the session immediately following the aforementioned session or successive sessions, both Houses agree to disapprove the issuance of the notification or both Chambers agree to make an amendment to the notification, the notification shall not be published or, as the case may be, only be published in such amended form as may be agreed by both Houses of Parliament.

Addressing an event here last year, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar had lamented that retired judges had kept the country’s arbitral system in a tight grip, denying any chance to other qualified minds. He said India is known for its rich human resources, but they are not selected to judge the arbitration process.

Successive governments have pushed to make India a hub for international arbitration along the lines of London and Singapore, with limited success. Pioneer News Service in New Delhi

Seeking to give “new impetus” to institutional arbitration and reduce court intervention in such cases, the government introduced a bill seeking views on the proposed amendments.

The Department of Legal Affairs of the Ministry of Justice has invited comments on the Draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, stating that “the aim and purpose is to give further impetus to arbitration institutional, to reduce the intervention of the courts in arbitrations and to ensure a rapid conclusion of arbitration proceedings.

The bill comes months after an expert committee headed by former law secretary and former Lok Sabha secretary general TK Vishwanathan submitted its report on proposed reforms in the arbitration sector to the ministry of Justice.

The bill proposes the concept of “emergency arbitration”.

The proposed amendment indicates that arbitral institutions may, for the purposes of granting interim measures, provide for the appointment of an “emergency arbitrator” before the constitution of an arbitral tribunal.

The appointed emergency arbitrator will conduct the proceedings in the manner specified by the (arbitration) council.

At the same time, the bill also omits some clauses from the current law.

One of the omitted clauses relates to the tabling of proposed notifications in both Houses of Parliament when they are in session.

The omitted clause read: “A copy of each notification proposed to be issued… Shall be laid in draft form before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of 30 days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiration of the session immediately following the aforementioned session or successive sessions, both Houses agree to disapprove the issuance of the notification or both Chambers agree to make an amendment to the notification, the notification shall not be published or, as the case may be, only be published in such amended form as may be agreed by both Houses of Parliament.

Addressing an event here last year, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar had lamented that retired judges had kept the country’s arbitral system in a tight grip, denying any chance to other qualified minds. He said India is known for its rich human resources, but they are not selected to judge the arbitration process.

Successive governments have pushed to make India a hub for international arbitration along the lines of London and Singapore, with limited success.