EXPERT WITNESSES IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS: HIRED GUNS OR NEUTRAL FACT-FINDERS? RETHINKING INDEPENDENCE, PROCEDURAL INTEGRITY, AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE IN ARBITRATION PRACTICE

Abstract

The legitimacy of arbitral proceedings increasingly depends not only on the application of law but also on the perceived neutrality and integrity of expert evidence. While expert witnesses are conventionally viewed as impartial providers of specialised knowledge to aid arbitral tribunals, the practical reality is more ambiguous. This paper interrogates the dual nature of expert witnesses as impartial aides or partisan tacticians within the structure of contemporary international arbitration. Drawing on comparative legal systems, institutional rules [including International Bar Association (IBA), United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)], and behavioural insights from legal psychology, it explores whether current frameworks adequately safeguard against bias, manipulation, and inequality of arms. It critiques the unregulated influence of shadow experts and the strategic overreliance on elite technical witnesses and evaluates emerging questions surrounding algorithmic and AI-generated evidence. The paper ultimately proposes reforms aimed at reinforcing the expert’s role as a neutral agent of justice, through hybrid tribunal-appointed models, regulatory harmonisation, and context-sensitive institutional standards.