Back
CJ Calls for More 'Brown' in at ADR Week
In a powerful address that resonated across the alternative dispute resolution community, Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru declared that the field of urgently needs greater diversity, specifically calling for more "brown" representation. Speaking at the Bengaluru leg of India ADR Week , hosted by the , the Chief Justice’s remarks underscored a persistent gap in the global arbitration landscape—a gap that Indian legal professionals are increasingly seeking to close.
The event, which brought together arbitrators, lawyers, academics, and policymakers, featured not only the Chief Justice’s keynote but also a panel discussion on artificial intelligence in arbitration and a lively debate on the practice of . These discussions collectively highlighted the evolving challenges and opportunities facing the arbitration community in India and beyond.
A Call for Inclusion
Chief Justice Bakhru’s statement—“We need to have more brown in ”—was direct and unapologetic. It acknowledged a long-standing critique: that , despite its global reach, remains disproportionately dominated by arbitrators from a narrow set of jurisdictions, primarily in Europe and North America. The Chief Justice’s call is particularly significant coming from the head of a High Court in India, a country that has emerged as a major hub for arbitration but whose practitioners often find themselves underrepresented in high-profile international panels.
The remark also aligns with global movements such as the Pledge for Greater and initiatives by organizations like the and to broaden the pool of arbitrators. By framing the issue in terms of “brown” representation, the Chief Justice highlighted the specific underrepresentation of South Asian and other non-white arbitrators, a nuance that is sometimes lost in broader diversity discussions.
The Diversity Deficit
The lack of is not merely a matter of optics; it affects the legitimacy and quality of arbitral decisions. A homogeneous panel may lack the varied perspectives needed to understand complex cross-cultural disputes, and parties from underrepresented regions may feel less confidence in the process. Statistics consistently show that a small number of predominantly white, male, Western-trained arbitrators handle the vast majority of international cases. Indian arbitrators, despite the country’s growing economic clout and legal sophistication, remain a rarity in major arbitral institutions’ rosters.
The Chief Justice’s call is a timely reminder that Indian legal talent is ready and capable of contributing at the highest levels. India has a rich tradition of legal scholarship, a robust judiciary, and a rapidly maturing arbitration ecosystem. Yet, systemic barriers—including network-based appointment practices, perceived biases, and lack of visibility—continue to hinder greater inclusion.
AI and the Future of Arbitration
Alongside the diversity debate, the ADR Week panel on artificial intelligence in arbitration explored how technology could either exacerbate or alleviate existing inequities. AI tools are increasingly used in document review, legal research, and even predictive analysis of arbitrator behavior. While these technologies can democratize access to information, they also risk encoding biases present in historical data. If AI-driven arbitrator selection tools rely on past appointments, they may perpetuate the same lack of diversity that the Chief Justice decried.
Panelists discussed the potential for AI to identify qualified arbitrators from non-traditional backgrounds, thereby widening the pool. However, they cautioned that such tools must be transparent and designed with inclusivity in mind. The conversation underscored the need for the arbitration community to actively shape how AI is deployed, rather than passively accepting algorithms that mirror existing inequalities.
Repeat Appointments: A Question of Independence
Another hotly debated topic at the Bengaluru leg was the practice of repeat appointments—where the same arbitrator is appointed in multiple cases by the same party or law firm. Critics argue that this can create perceptions of bias or dependence, undermining the that is the bedrock of arbitration. Proponents contend that repeat appointments allow parties to select arbitrators with proven expertise and efficiency.
The debate ties directly to diversity. If a small cadre of arbitrators receives repeated appointments, it becomes even harder for new, diverse voices to break into the market. The Chief Justice’s call for more “brown” arbitrators implicitly challenges the closed-loop nature of arbitrator selection. By broadening the pool, the system not only becomes fairer but also enhances its overall credibility.
Implications for the Legal Community
For legal professionals in India and across the Global South, the Chief Justice’s remarks signal a shift in official discourse. Senior judicial figures are now openly advocating for a more inclusive arbitration landscape. This could encourage law firms, corporate counsel, and arbitral institutions to proactively seek out diverse candidates. It may also spur Indian bar associations and arbitration bodies to create mentorship programs, visibility campaigns, and training initiatives aimed at preparing Indian practitioners for international appointments.
Moreover, the integration of AI and the scrutiny of repeat appointments are likely to become more prominent features of arbitration policy discussions. Indian lawyers and arbitrators should stay abreast of these developments, as they will shape the rules and norms governing international disputes in the years to come.
Conclusion
The Bengaluru leg of India ADR Week , under the aegis of MCIA, has once again positioned India at the forefront of critical conversations in arbitration. Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru’s call for more “brown” representation is not merely a soundbite—it is a challenge to the status quo. Coupled with explorations of AI’s role and debates on appointment practices, the event offered a roadmap for a more equitable and effective arbitration system.
As the global arbitration community grapples with questions of legitimacy, fairness, and innovation, voices from India—like that of the Chief Justice—are essential. The path forward requires deliberate action: from institutions, from practitioners, and from the legal academy. The message from Bengaluru is clear: the future of must be diverse, technologically savvy, and ethically sound. And it must include more brown.
