Delegating Urgency: AI in Emergency Arbitration
This Article examines whether artificial intelligence (“AI”) can serve as an emergency arbitrator in international arbitration. While AI’s limitations in human judgment, credibility assessment, and contextual interpretation render it unsuitable for merits adjudication, emergency arbitration presents a structurally distinct environment where AI integration may be appropriate. Emergency proceedings do not resolve substantive disputes but preserve the arbitral process through provisional measures based on standardized criteria—urgency, irreparable harm, prima facie case, and proportionality. These decisions rely on limited documentary records, operate under compressed timelines, and remain subject to tribunal review. Building on the American Arbitration Association’s (“AAA”) empirical demonstration that AI can function effectively in merits arbitration with human oversight and grounding the argument in fifteen years of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”) Arbitration Institute’s emergency arbitration practice, this article argues a fortiori that AI is even more suitable for emergency relief. The proposed AI Emergency Arbitrator (“AIEA”) model adapts the AAA’s human-in-the-loop framework to emergency contexts, requiring human validation before issuance while preserving party autonomy through opt-out rights and tribunal review mechanisms. The Article addresses potential objections regarding trust, enforcement, error, and scope creep, demonstrating how the AIEA can enhance speed, consistency, and accessibility without compromising arbitration’s foundational principles of fairness, consent, and human accountability. The AIEA represents not technological replacement but strategic integration—deploying algorithmic efficiency where procedural urgency demands it, while maintaining human judgment where interpretive reasoning remains irreplaceable.
Author: Bahadir Köksal
Volume 28, Issue 1