An Analysis of the Legal Frameworks of the International Commercial Arbitration in the Context of Pakistan

Abstract

This study critically analyzed the legal frameworks governing the recognition and enforcement of international commercial arbitral awards in Pakistan, with a particular focus on the REFA, 2011. Despite being a signatory to the NYC and enacting legislation to domesticate it, Pakistan has continued to encounter serious issues in aligning its domestic legal system with international arbitration standards. The research adopted a doctrinal legal research methodology to examine statutory provisions, leading case law, and judicial trends. It was observed that several provisions of the 2011 Act suffered from ambiguity, particularly in relation to the scope of court jurisdiction, interpretation of public policy, and procedural formalities for the enforcement of foreign awards. Judicial inconsistency and excessive court intervention emerged as critical impediments, undermining the purpose of arbitration as an alternative to litigation. Through case analysis, it was demonstrated that the Pakistani judiciary occasionally deviated from the pro-enforcement bias mandated under the NYC thereby affecting the reliability of Pakistan as a pro-arbitration jurisdiction. This study concluded that while the legal foundation for enforcement exists, the implementation remained weak and required structural reforms and judicial training to enhance consistency, predictability, and investor confidence. In order to ensure Pakistan’s compliance with its international obligations and to promote foreign investment, the arbitral regime must be restructured to reflect global best practices.