| T |
he third Pakistan International Disputes Weekend is on October 11-12. More than ceremonial optimism, the moment demands institutional introspection. The PIDW is not merely a legal congregation; it is a reformist intervention aimed at recalibrating Pakistan’s global posture in dispute resolution. With participation from CIArb, DRBF, LCIA, SIAC, UNCITRAL and regional arbitral bodies, the PIDW offers a rare convergence of doctrine, diplomacy and development. It reflects a growing recognition that Pakistan’s credibility as a seat for arbitration, mediation and infrastructure adjudication must be earned through reform, not assumed through attendance.
The forum’s layered agenda spans investor-state disputes, CPEC contract enforcement, mandatory mediation and lifecycle contracting. This signalled a strategic shift from fragmented legal inertia to curated reformist agenda. The presence of global thought leaders, including UNCITRAL Legal Officers, CIArb presidents and regional construction law societies, made the PIDW more than a domestic showcase. It became a directional map for institutional modernisation.
Institutional convergence
The PIDW 2025 co-hosts include CIArb Pakistan, the Dispute Resolution Board Foundation, the Pakistan Engineering Council and No 5 Barristers Chambers. The supporting organsations include Columbia Law School, the HKIAC, the CIETAC, the ISTAC, the ACICA and the International Dispute Resolution Centre. This breadth of participation affirms Pakistan’s growing relevance in the global dispute resolution ecosystem. But convergence alone is insufficient; it must translate into procedural harmonisation, regional panel-building and enforceable reform.
The presence of Azam Nazeer Tarar, the federal minister for law and justice, as keynote speaker, and Kevin Nash of the LCIA in the opening session, signals high-level engagement with both domestic reform and international arbitration leadership. The inclusion of PEC Chairman Waseem Nazir and DRBF’s Xavier Leynaud anchors the PIDW in the infrastructure and engineering domains.
A strategic rpositioning
Pakistan’s dispute resolution architecture has long suffered from procedural inertia, doctrinal ambiguity and institutional fragmentation. The PIDW 2025 confronts these fault lines head-on. Panels such as ISDS Toolkit: The Quantum Leap by UNCITRAL and Islamabad for Investors: Building a Trusted Seat represented strategic recalibration.
The inclusion of a CPEC-focused ADR panel, moderated by Virginie Colaiuta, is particularly instructive. It invited Pakistan to institutionalise dispute boards, embed enforceable mechanisms in high-value infrastructure contracts and curate a roster of qualified neutrals. The Reko Diq Diariessession underscoredthe urgency of transparency, investor confidence and resource nationalism – issues that cannot be resolved through litigation alone.
The presence of UNCITRAL’s Aleksei Korachkin and Linklaters’ Matthew Hodgson reflects a growing interest in harmonising Pakistan’s legal frameworks with global standards. Their discussions on jurisdictional objections, seat-law combinations and model law evolution were not theoretical. They were foundational to Pakistan’s credibility in cross-border disputes.
Strategic panels
Each of the following panels offers a doctrinal lens into Pakistan’s reformist potential:
ISDS reform and legal harmonisation: Attorney General Mansoor Awan and Justice Zulfiqar Khan speak about judicial reflections on UNCITRAL’s evolving toolkit, linking investment dispute settlement with constitutional principles and rule of law.
CPEC disputes & FIDIC stress points: The Contractor’s Roadmap panel explores the interpretation of FIDIC contracts under stress, ICC enforcement and DAAB integration. Rafey Siddiqui’s subtopic on employer attitudes toward arbitration adds a behavioural lens to the doctrinal critique.
Islamabad as a seat: The Islamabad for Investors panel reframes the city as a potential global seat. Alessa Pang (Singapore), Noor Siddiqi (London) and Huma Ijaz (Pakistan) provide comparative insights from SIAC, LCIA and the ICSID jurisdictions. The discussions highlight the significance of legal certainty, neutrality and enforcement for investor confidence.
The inclusion of a CPEC-focused ADR panel, moderated by Virginie Colaiuta, is particularly instructive. It invites Pakistan to institutionalise dispute boards, embed enforceable mechanisms in high-value infrastructure contracts and curate a roster of qualified neutrals.
Mediation as economic catalyst: The Mandatory Mediation panel, features experts from Japan, Lebanon and Australia. Dr Masako Miyatake’s experience with Japan’s mandatory mediation regime and Brandon Malone’s adjudication expertise offer actionable models for Pakistan’s judiciary and legislature.
CIArb’s global entry pathways: The Capacity, Credentials and Connections panel offer a roadmap for Pakistani professionals to enter global panels. Michael Tonkin (CIArb President-elect), Henk Louw (South Africa) and Olusola Adegbonmire (Nigeria) discuss how MCIArb and FCIArb titles translate into global appointments, making an institutional leap beyond local accreditation.
Sectoral arbitration trends: The Arbitration Across Sectors panel, moderated by Robert Sliwinski, explored arbitration’s evolution in construction, energy, finance and healthcare. Shanza Baig, Ishtiaq Nawaz Chichi and Rashid Mureed offered sector-specific insights. Paul Tan (One Essex Court) discussed the emergence of international commercial courts.
Innovation, inclusion and institutional memory
The PIDW 2025 is integrating innovation showcases on AI-human partnerships, digital twins for CPEC and Punjab’s ADR integration. Thara Ghoplan (AAA), Brig Sharjeel Ashraf (NLC) and Advocate General Amjad Pervaiz address the gaps between technology, compliance and adjudication. These sessions are foundational to Pakistan’s ambition to host disputes that transcend borders and sectors.
PIDW’s layered inclusion, from construction law societies across Asia to gender-diverse panels, reflects a maturing institutional memory. The CPEC 2.0 panel, featuring Zubair Ijaz, Mian Zafar Klaunari and Waseem Raza, emphasises regional knowledge-sharing, capacity-building and climate-sensitive infrastructure contracting.
Politics of resource disputes
The Reko Diq Diaries panel stands out as one of the most politically and commercially consequential sessions. Uzair Shafie of Haidermota & Co and Giorgiana Tecuci of the Dispute Resolution Board Foundation offers a layered dissection of Pakistan’s most high-profile resource dispute, unpacking its legal architecture, commercial sensitivitiesand reputational stakes. Their analysis of lifecycle contracting, transparency obligations and investor-state arbitration frameworks extends beyond Reko Diq. It served as a cautionary blueprint for Pakistan’s extractive sector, where contractual ambiguity and regulatory opacity can still undermine investor confidence.
This panel did not merely revisit past controversies. It issued a forward-looking challenge to Pakistan’s legal and institutional apparatus. The discussion calls for embedding dispute avoidance mechanisms at the contract design stage, clarifying jurisdictional boundaries across federal and provincial regimes and aligning resource governance with international best practices. In doing so, it reframes Reko Diq not as an isolated episode but as a test for Pakistan’s capacity to host, manage and resolve high-stakes resource disputes with credibility, foresight and enforceable governance.
Regional benchmarking
Pakistan’s reformist ambition must be benchmarked against regional peers. Nigeria’s arbitration reforms, including the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023, offer a model for legislative clarity and institutional independence. Singapore’s rise as a global seat is anchored in judicial support, procedural efficiency and sectoral specialisation. Egypt’s integration of DAAB in infrastructure contracts reflects a pragmatic approach to dispute avoidance.
PIDW’s comparative panels featuring speakers from Nigeria, Singapore, Egypt and other jurisdictions were meant to be strategic instruments of reform rather than ceremonial exchanges. Pakistan must move decisively to audit its arbitration laws, eliminate doctrinal ambiguities and align procedural architecture with the standards set by UNCITRAL’s Model Law and ICSID’s enforcement regime. This is not a technical footnote, it is rather a reputational imperative. Without harmonisation and institutional depth, Pakistan will remain a peripheral venue in the global dispute resolution landscape. The challenge is to internalise regional successes, innovate beyond replication and assert a reformist identity anchored in neutrality, enforceability, and strategic foresight.
Reformist closure
PIDW 2025 must be understood not as a ceremonial destination but as a strategic instrument of reform. It embodies Pakistan’s ambition to emerge as a credible seat for arbitration, mediation and inclusive governance. This ambition cannot be fulfilled through symbolic participation or high-profile attendance. Credibility is not gained through presence; it is constructed through reform. The success of PIDW will not be measured by the prominence of its speakers or the diversity of its panels. It will be judged by its ability to provoke legislative recalibration, enforce doctrinal clarity, and instil institutional coherence across Pakistan’s dispute resolution landscape.
Pakistan faces a moment of institutional reckoning. The forum offers more than reflection – it demands redirection. The country must choose whether PIDW will serve as a mirror that reflects its fragmented legal past or as a map that guides its institutional future. This is not a rhetorical choice. It is a structural challenge that requires political will, legal precision and sustained commitment to reform. The burden of transformation rests not on the event but on the institutions that must respond to it.
The writer is a contracts specialist. He can be reached at sbilalhussaingmail.com