Shashank Garg: Institutional Arbitrator Appointment India Reform Proposed

• Senior Advocate Shashank Garg proposed that arbitrator appointments in India be shifted from parties to courts or arbitral institutions.
• The aim of this `India arbitration reform proposal` is to enhance `arbitrator independence India` by removing allegiance to appointing parties or law firms.
• Garg acknowledged that this change would curtail `party autonomy arbitrator appointment` and requires extensive deliberation.
• He believes institutional appointments would restore state faith in arbitration and positively impact dispute resolution.
• These remarks were made during a panel discussion at `Singapore Convention Week 2026` focusing on India's dispute resolution system.

While championing the benefits of institutional appointments, Shashank Garg openly acknowledged that his `India arbitration reform proposal` would inevitably curtail `party autonomy arbitrator appointment`, a principle traditionally held in high regard within arbitration practice.

Senior Advocate Shashank Garg recently put forth a significant `India arbitration reform proposal`, advocating for a fundamental shift in how arbitrators are appointed. Speaking at a panel discussion during `Singapore Convention Week 2026`, Garg proposed that the authority to appoint arbitrators should be removed from the disputing parties themselves and instead be entrusted to either judicial bodies or established arbitral institutions. This bold suggestion aims to reshape the landscape of `Shashank Garg institutional arbitrator appointment India`, moving towards a more structured and impartial system.

The discussion, held at Maxwell Chambers, focused on evaluating whether India's current infrastructure dispute-resolution framework is adequately aligned with the nation's ambitious economic growth objectives. The event was collaboratively organized by several prominent entities in the legal and arbitration fields, including JSA, the International Arbitration and Mediation Centre, the Arbitration Bar of India, White & Case, and Osborne Partners. JSA Partner Ananya Kumar served as the moderator for the insightful session, which brought together leading voices to discuss critical issues facing India's arbitration ecosystem.

The core rationale behind Senior Advocate Garg's `institutional arbitration India debate` contribution centers on fostering greater `arbitrator independence India`. By transferring the appointment power away from the parties, his proposal seeks to eliminate any perceived or actual allegiance an arbitrator might feel towards the entity or law firm that appointed them. Garg articulated that such a change would ensure arbitrators operate without "masters," thereby removing potential conflicts of interest that could arise from their selection process.

He contended that this institutionalized approach would significantly enhance the neutrality and impartiality of arbitrators, thereby restoring and strengthening the state's confidence in the arbitration mechanism as a reliable and fair means of dispute resolution. Garg expressed optimism that implementing this "significant change" could resolve "half of our problems" within the current system, leading to profoundly positive impacts on the efficiency and integrity of arbitration proceedings across the country.

While championing the benefits of institutional appointments, Shashank Garg openly acknowledged that his `India arbitration reform proposal` would inevitably curtail `party autonomy arbitrator appointment`, a principle traditionally held in high regard within arbitration practice. He recognized that such a substantial alteration to established norms could not be implemented immediately and would necessitate extensive further deliberation and thoughtful debate among stakeholders.

Despite the acknowledged challenge to party autonomy, Garg underscored the potential for long-term positive transformation. The ongoing discussions, particularly within forums like `Singapore Convention Week India arbitration`, highlight a broader national conversation about modernizing India's dispute resolution infrastructure to support its economic aspirations. The proposal thus contributes to a vital dialogue on how best to balance traditional principles with the evolving demands for a more independent and credible arbitration system.

Lawyers and compliance officers in India should monitor discussions surrounding the institutionalisation of arbitrator appointments, as any future legislative or policy changes based on this proposal could significantly impact how arbitrators are selected, potentially reducing party control but enhancing the perceived neutrality and efficiency of arbitration proceedings in the long term.

Source: Reporting based on industry insights.