Confidentiality in ICSID Arbitration after AMCO Asia Corp. v. Indonesia: Watchword or White Elephant
Abstract
Part I of this Note will discuss the manner in which ICSID arbitration acts as a contractual substitute for litigation before national courts. Part II will review the decision of the ICSID tribunal in Amco Asia Corp. In Part III, the Note will examine the confidentiality requirement imposed by the ICSID Convention and the Arbitration Rules, and will discuss the arguments for and against keeping arbitral proceedings secret. In light of this examination and discussion, the Note will argue that the ICSID tribunal correctly denied injunctive relief to Indonesia, although the denial may be inconsistent with the spirit of confidentiality traditionally associated with arbitral proceedings. This Note will conclude by recommending that article 48(5) of the ICSID Convention be changed to reflect a presumption against confidentiality, and in favor of the publication of awards.
Recommended Citation
Benjamin H. Tahyar,
Confidentiality in ICSID Arbitration after AMCO Asia Corp. v. Indonesia: Watchword or White Elephant,
10 Fordham Int'l L.J. 93
(1986).
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol10/iss1/4