The Supreme Court has sought a response from the Union government regarding the delay in constituting the Arbitration Council of India (ACI), a central regulatory body mandated under the 2019 amendments to the Arbitration Act. This development coincides with the government’s release of the Draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which aims to further institutionalize dispute resolution and introduce provisions for “emergency arbitration.”
Context – “Has arbitration council been constituted?” This has been the news An Op-Ed in The Hindu dated 18 January 2026.
Arbitration and the Regulatory Shift
What is Arbitration?
Arbitration is an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism where a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. In doing so, they choose a private tribunal instead of going to court.
The Indian law is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which is based on the UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. ¹
The Arbitration Council of India (ACI)
To move India away from “ad-hoc arbitration” (where parties arrange the process themselves) toward “institutional arbitration” (managed by specialized institutions), the 2019 Amendment Act established the ACI (Arbitration Council of India (ACI).
- It is a statutory corporate body.
- Its primary duties are to frame policies for grading arbitral institutions, accredit arbitrators, and maintain a repository of arbitral awards. It aims to promote uniform professional standards in arbitration. ²
- The ACI is headed by a Chairperson who has been a Judge of the Supreme Court, a Chief Justice of a High Court, a Judge of a High Court, or an eminent person with special knowledge in arbitration, appointed by the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. ²
Ad-Hoc vs. Institutional Arbitration
- Ad-Hoc: Parties determine the rules, procedure, and appoint arbitrators themselves without an administering body. This is currently the dominant mode in India but is often plagued by delays. ³
- Institutional: The process is administered by an institution (e.g., Singapore International Arbitration Centre) with its own set of rules. The Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee (2017) recommended shifting to this model to reduce court intervention. ³
Comparison of Reforms
The evolution of India’s arbitration landscape can be understood by following table .
| Feature | 1996 Act (Original) | 2019 Amendment Act | Draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024 (Proposed) ⁴ |
| Regulatory Body | None. Completely party-driven. | Established the Arbitration Council of India (ACI) for grading and policy. | Empowers ACI further; proposes “Arbitration Act” as the new title (removing ‘Conciliation’). |
| Emergency Arbitration | Not explicitly recognized. (Enforced via court orders only). | Silent. | Explicitly defines “Emergency Arbitration” and grants statutory status to emergency awards. |
| Appellate Mechanism | Appeals against awards filed in Courts (Section 34). | No change. | Proposes an Appellate Arbitral Tribunal within institutions to hear appeals, reducing court burden. |
| Judicial Intervention | High intervention in appointments and interim relief. | Reduced. Courts designate graded institutions to appoint arbitrators. | Limits interim relief by courts; once arbitration starts, no court interim orders allowed generally. |
Understand the difference
- Seat vs. Venue
- You may think “Seat” and “Venue” are the same just the physical location where hearings happen.
- The “Seat” is the legal home of the arbitration, determining which courts have jurisdiction (e.g., to annul the award). The “Venue” is merely the geographic location where meetings are held for convenience. Changing the venue does not change the seat.
- Conciliation vs. Arbitration
- In Arbitration, the arbitrator gives a binding decision (Award). In Conciliation, the conciliator assists parties to reach a settlement, but cannot impose a decision. If a settlement is reached, it has the status of an arbitral award.
- ACI as a Dispute Resolver
- The ACI is a regulator and policy-maker. It grades institutions and sets standards; it does not arbitrate specific disputes itself.
Sources
1. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985)
2. Ministry of Law and Justice, Govt. of India, The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019, Official Gazette.
3. Press Information Bureau (PIB), Report of the High-Level Committee to Review the Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India (Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee), 2017.
4. Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice, Draft Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2024, Public Consultation Notice.
