发布时间： Mon Oct 16 20:14:50 CST 2017 供稿人：林志炜
作者：北京仲裁委员会/北京国际仲裁中心秘书长林志炜。北仲仲裁秘书刘文鹏及实习生陈俊宇对英文内容亦有贡献
Lin Zhiwei is the secretary-general of Beijing Arbitration Commission/Beijing International Arbitration Center. BAC/BIAC’s case manager Liu Wenpeng and intern Chen Junyu also contributed to the article
“一带一路”倡议作为国家顶层政策规划，目前已获得68个国家和地区的积极响应。同时，由于“一带一路”沿线国家和地区的经济发展水平不一、法律体系不同、投资环境差异，各类主体间的经济贸易纠纷在所难免，纠纷解决机制的保障因而必不可少。基于《纽约公约》发展而来的现代国际仲裁，因其跨国执行的巨大优势，将成为“一带一路”倡议落实过程中极具发展潜力的纠纷解决机制。中国商事仲裁机构若能因势利导，或将在这一历史进程中发挥更为主要的作用。
北京仲裁委员会/ 北京国际仲裁中心（北仲）顺应“一带一路”的政策背景，积极组建多地域的纠纷解决合作平台，打造服务不同商事主体的“仲裁联合体”。北仲于2017年5月9日与吉隆坡区域仲裁中心、开罗地区国际商事仲裁中心共同联合发起“一带一路仲裁行动计划”，以及在中国法学会的指导和协调下于2017年3月27日与内罗毕国际仲裁中心正式成立中非联合仲裁中心——北京中心和内罗毕中心，即是北仲着力深化“一带一路”沿线地区法律合作的重要尝试。
立足当下，着眼未来，中国商事仲裁机构应该用更为长远的眼光审视并参与到“一带一路”倡议的落实过程之中。一方面，中国仲裁机构推进“一带一路”仲裁发展，责无旁贷。另一方面，商事仲裁为“一带一路”倡议保驾护航，任重道远。
中国仲裁行业经多年蓬勃发展，已迈上新的历史台阶；包括北仲、上海国际仲裁中心（SHIAC）、深圳国际仲裁院（SCIA）等在内的一大批本土生长的仲裁机构，已基本具备提供高质量国际化仲裁服务的条件，其在世界范围内的口碑和影响力正是推进“一带一路”倡议下仲裁国际合作的“中国力量”。面对“一带一路”沿线国家“商事仲裁的发展水平不同”、“仲裁法律制度的规定不一”等问题，如何能够吸引、影响更多国家和地区的主体在“相同规则、相同机制下”解决问题，将是中国仲裁行业未来发展所面临的挑战。
中国仲裁机构应通过优化治理结构、完善仲裁规则、培养专业人才等措施提升仲裁服务的专业性及国际化；通过仲裁服务的提供、专业知识的传播等方式，提升国内外企业对于商事仲裁以及中国仲裁机构的认可程度；并积极调动自身资源，深化与沿线国家争议解决机构的交流与合作，加深仲裁机构及仲裁从业者对于沿线他国法制体系及仲裁制度的了解。也只有这样，中国仲裁行业与“一带一路”沿线国家和地区的仲裁同仁才能共同推动区域内仲裁服务行业的长远发展。
正如习近平主席所说，“历史总是要前进的，历史从不等待一切犹豫者、观望者、懈怠者、软弱者。只有与历史同步伐、与时代共命运的人，才能赢得光明的未来”。在 “一带一路”倡议深入推进的历史性时刻，中国仲裁机构应通过强化自身实力、深化外部合作等举措为“一带一路”倡议提供专业、优质的仲裁服务。北仲十分愿意，并将一如既往为该历史进程添砖加瓦，促进商事仲裁在“一带一路”倡议中应有作用的发挥。
（本文摘录自北京仲裁委员会/ 北京国际仲裁中心秘书长林志炜在第七届大中华仲裁论坛的专题发言。）
As an initiative announced by China’s top policymaking body, the Belt and Road initiative has so far been endorsed by 68 countries and regions. Because these countries and regions differ in economic strength, legal tradition and investment environment, commercial disputes will inevitably occur between trading parties, and so an effective dispute resolution mechanism is needed. With its advantage of transnational enforcement, secured by the New York Convention, international arbitration has the potential of becoming the best dispute resolution of Belt and Road-related issues. If commercial arbitration institutions in China can adopt an open mindset and adapt to international practice, they may play a greater role as the Belt and Road initiative evolves.
The Beijing Arbitration Commission/ Beijing International Arbitration Centre (BAC/BIAC) has seized the opportunity arising from the Belt and Road initiative by actively starting a cross-border dispute resolution collaboration and forming an “institutional coalition”. The “One Belt One Road Arbitration Initiative” is a new collaboration between the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (KLRCA), the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (CRCICA) and the BAC/BIAC, which was initiated on 9 May 2017.
Also, under the guidance of the China Law Society, the BAC/BIAC and Nairobi International Arbitration Centre (NIAC) launched the China-Africa Joint Arbitration Centre (CAJAC) - consisting of the CAJAC Beijing Centre and the CAJAC Nairobi Centre - as an institutional coalition on 27 March 2017. These efforts signified the BAC/ BIAC’s attempt to establish sophisticated Belt and Road arbitration theories and practices.
Based in the present and looking toward the future, commercial arbitration institutions in China must see the bigger picture of the Belt and Road Initiative and act prospectively. On one hand, a prosperous arbitration community along the Belt and Road must be a common pursuit of commercial arbitration institutions in China, but on the other hand, safeguarding trade and commerce along the Belt and Road will in no way be an easy task.
After years of development, arbitration in China is stepping onto a new stage. Local-born arbitration institutions such as the BAC/BIAC, the Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (SHIAC), and the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (SCIA) have been capable of providing their arbitration services to international standards. Their international reputations and influence will boost the development of arbitration theories and practices along the Belt and Road, and thus become the “China Force”. At the same time, the different levels of maturity of commercial arbitration practice and the different arbitration-related legal regimes along the Belt and Road will bring challenges to the arbitration industry in China, including how to attract and promote arbitration, and solve parties’ hesitations and problems under “common norms and rules”.
Arbitration institutions in China must secure their professionalism and keep abreast of international practice by optimizing governance structure, updating arbitration rules, and maintaining a professional talent pool. We will be better recognized by parties at home and abroad if our arbitration services and experience are better presented. We must also take advantage of our geographic accessibility to interact with dispute resolution bodies along the Belt and Road, and learn the different legal traditions and arbitration regimes between each other. Only by these endeavours can the arbitration industry in China and that of our counterparts along the Belt and Road jointly improve arbitration theories and practices in the long run.
President Xi Jinping said: “History always progresses. And history awaits no hesitator, observer, idler or languisher. Only people who stay abreast of historical development may win a bright future. ” It could be a turning point for arbitral institutions in China to expand external partnerships and build a stronger credibility by providing cutting-edge arbitration services, as well as taking other initiatives along the Belt and Road. By contributing to the prosperity of arbitration theories and practices along the Belt and Road, the BAC/BIAC is devoting itself to this undertaking.
(This article is adapted from a speech by Lin Zhiwei, secretary-general of the BAC/BIAC at the 7th Greater China Arbitration Forum.)
