Volume 11, Issue 2 (February 2024), Pages: 219-229

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Cybersecurity in international commercial arbitration (Legal vision)

 Author(s): 

 Asmaa Saad Hussien *, Hani Mohamed Mounes

 Affiliation(s):

 Department of Law, College of Business Administration, Northern Border University, Arar, Saudi Arabia

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5560-6873

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.02.023

 Abstract

Attracting foreign investment requires assurances from states to safeguard against infringements and losses. Arbitration serves as a crucial factor in enticing investors. However, for arbitration to be effective, ensuring information security is imperative. Maintaining confidentiality and preventing disclosure are vital, yet they pose challenges. International experiences indicate that companies might accept unjust settlements to prevent revealing their trade secrets. To tackle these obstacles, various arbitration bodies have endeavored to establish legal mechanisms for ensuring information security. This involves targeting individuals involved in arbitration proceedings and enhancing technical infrastructure. For instance, the International Council for Arbitration (ICCA), in collaboration with the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) and the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR), devised an Electronic Security Protocol for Commercial Arbitration. These initiatives aim to shield participants in international commercial arbitration from the risks of divulging sensitive information due to breaches in information security. The protocol offers a framework of guidelines for arbitrators and parties on safeguarding confidential information throughout the arbitration process. It encompasses aspects like confidentiality agreements, data protection, access control, security measures for electronic devices and data, and procedures for handling incidents. By adhering to these guidelines, arbitrators and parties can uphold the protection of confidential information, thus ensuring that international commercial arbitration remains a secure platform for dispute resolution.

 © 2024 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Foreign investment, Arbitration, Information security, Confidentiality, Cyberattacks

 Article history

 Received 13 October 2023, Received in revised form 1 February 2024, Accepted 3 February 2024

 Acknowledgment 

The authors gratefully acknowledge the approval and support of this research study by Grant No. BSAA-2022-11-1628 from the Deanship of Scientific Research at Northern Border University, Arar, KSA.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Hussien AS and Mounes HM (2024). Cybersecurity in international commercial arbitration (Legal vision). International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(2): 219-229

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 No Table

----------------------------------------------   

 References (21)

1. AAA (2021).  AAA rules, forms and fees. American Arbitration Association, New York, USA.
2. Awaisheh SM (2023). Digital justice in Jordan: The role of virtual arbitration sessions in modernizing the legal system. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 17(1): 146-165.   [Google Scholar]
3. Blackaby N, Partasides C, Redfern A, and Hunter M (2023). Redfern and hunter on international arbitration: Student version. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.   [Google Scholar]
4. Blair C and Gojkovic EV (2018). WikiLeaks and beyond: Discerning an international standard for the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence. ICSID Review: Foreign Investment Law Journal, 33(1): 235-259. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/six030   [Google Scholar]
5. Chaisse J and Bauer C (2019). Cybersecurity and the protection of digital assets: Assessing the role of international investment law and arbitration. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law, 21(3): 549-590.   [Google Scholar]
6. Cohen S and Morril M (2017). A call to cyberarms: The international arbitrator’s duty to avoid digital intrusion. Fordham International Law Journal, 40(3): 981-1022.   [Google Scholar]
7. CRCICA (2024). Arbitration rules. The Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration, Cairo, Egypt.  
8. Cremades BM and Cortes R (2013). The principle of confidentiality in arbitration: A necessary crisis. Journal of Arbitration Studies, 23(3): 25-38. https://doi.org/10.16998/jas.2013.23.3.25   [Google Scholar]
9. ICCA (2020). ICCA-NYC Bar-CPR protocol on cybersecurity in international arbitration. International Council for Commercial Arbitration, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
10. ICDR-AAA (2023). Rules, forms and fees. International Centre for Dispute Resolution, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
11. Landolt P and Garcia A (2017). Commentary on WIPO arbitration rules. WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, Geneva, Switzerland.   [Google Scholar]
12. LCIA (2020). LCIA arbitration rules 2020. LCIA, London Court of International Arbitration, London, UK. 
13. Lee J (2020). The coronavirus pandemic and international investment arbitration-application of "security exceptions" clauses in investment agreements. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, 13(1): 185-204.   [Google Scholar]
14. McKeon RW (1994). Electronic data interchange: Uses and legal aspects in the commercial arena. UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology and Privacy Law, 12(4): 511-536.   [Google Scholar]
15. Pastore J (2017). Practical approaches to cybersecurity in arbitration. Fordham International Law Journal, 40(3): 1023-1032.   [Google Scholar]
16. Pauwelyn J (2023). The WTO's multi-party interim appeal arbitration arrangement (MPIA): What's New? World Trade Review, 22(5): 693-701. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745623000204   [Google Scholar]
17. Shehata I (2018). Three potential imminent benefits of blockchain for international arbitration: Cybersecurity, confidentiality and efficiency. Young Arbitration Review. Available online at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3290028 
18. SIAC (2016). Arbitration rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre. Singapore International Arbitration Centre, Downtown Core, Singapore.   [Google Scholar]
19. Singer DC (2020). Arbitration privacy and confidentiality in the age of (Coronavirus) technology. Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, 38(7): 107-108. https://doi.org/10.1002/alt.21849   [Google Scholar] PMCid:PMC7361227
20. Sussman E (2018). Cyber attacks: Issues raised in arbitration. New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer, 11(2): 10-12.   [Google Scholar]
21. Yu HL (2020). 'Business as usual' during an unprecedented time-the issues of data protection and cybersecurity in international arbitration. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, 13(1): 45-66.   [Google Scholar]