A great deal has been written over the years about the evidence of corruption in international arbitration. In that context, this article offers a timely analysis of some of the most contentious rules and principles applicable in relation to the evidence of corruption allegations in investment arbitration. On the basis of an assessment of forty investment awards dealing with corruption, it is demonstrated that it matters relatively little which standard of evidence is applied by arbitral tribunals. The arbitral practice also reveals that, in recent years, arbitrators have come to rely more heavily on their discretion over evidentiary matters in order to contribute to the fight against corruption. This trend has materialized not only in relation to the arbitrators’ growing reliance on their investigative powers, but also their acceptance of more flexible means of evidence for the purpose of demonstrating the reality of corrupt practices.
Investment arbitration, Evidence of corruption, Standard of evidence, Means of evidence, Power to raise corruption matters sua sponte
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.