Possibility for AI Arbitrators to Replace Human Arbitrators: Legal and Social Perspective

Abstract

The rapid advancement of technology and the increasing adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) have prompted significant debate within international arbitration. This study examines whether AI arbitrators could replace human decision-makers or if their role is more appropriately understood as supportive tools within the arbitral process. Although previous scholarship has explored the potential of AI in arbitration, persistent uncertainties remain concerning enforceability, conceptual clarity, and compatibility with existing legal frameworks. The primary objective of this research is to critically assess these challenges while addressing the broader implications of integrating AI into arbitral practice. To achieve this, the study employs a mixed-method approach. It combines a normative legal analysis of current arbitral laws and principles with empirical insights drawn from an original survey conducted by the author. In addition, the study incorporates statistical data from a recent practitioner-based survey to provide comparative context and enrich the analysis. The findings reveal that while AI offers considerable promise in enhancing efficiency, consistency, and accessibility in arbitration, practitioners express caution regarding its ability to fully replace human arbitrators. Concerns related to procedural fairness, transparency, and enforceability of awards remain central, with respondents emphasizing that AI is better suited to complement human decision-making rather than replace it. This study contributes originality by merging legal theory with practitioner perspectives, thereby bridging the gap between abstract legal debates and practical realities.