THE NATIONAL ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION REGULATORY COMMISSION BILL

international trade. Arbitration is a truly international practice. Parties may appoint arbitrators from any jurisdiction and may choose procedural rules that are familiar to both sides. Parties are also allowed by the same principle of party autonomy to conduct their arbitration in a country different from the countries of the parties and in the same light may appoint nationals of a state other than that of the parties as presiding or sole arbitrator. The proposed bill will tend to remove Nigeria and Nigerian practitioners from this global practice. This is because any country whose law regulate the sphere of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution in this manner is seen as not being arbitration friendly and would be ostracised in the global scheme of things as far as arbitration and alternative dispute resolution is concerned. Nigerian nationals would therefore seize to get appointments as arbitrators in disputes involving other nationals and also Nigeria will rarely be designated a seat (venue) of such arbitration.

It is also foolhardy to imagine that it would be practical for the commission which the bill intends to establish to be able to accredit or regulate international arbitration bodies such as the ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris or the London Court of International Arbitration, London. This is because parties are allowed by international practice to decide by agreement who should settle their disputes. It would appear that indeed the proponents of this bill know little or nothing in the sphere of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution generally for there are so many questions that beg to be answered. The bill in its present state does not suggest that the accreditation which the commission will be empowered to carry out will be restricted to Nigerian ADR institutions. We belong to a global community and arbitration by its very nature is international in approach. Does the bill envision that the commission would accredit foreign ADR bodies which Nigerian parties may have recourse to for the resolution of their disputes? Is it expected that these foreign ADR bodies will submit themselves for accreditation by this Nigerian commission?

Arbitration is a catalyst for international trade; there is a direct correlation between arbitration friendly legal regimes and foreign direct investment in that when business people enter into foreign trade and investment transactions the possibility of future disputes is seen as a risk of the transaction. This risk is even amplified when businesses cannot be certain that reliable procedures are available to resolve any such dispute promptly and fairly, such as is the case of the proposed bill. When risk is increased because effective dispute resolution procedures are not available, businesses react in one of two ways: either they refuse to enter