Dealing with Corruption Allegations in International Investment Arbitration: Reaching a Procedural Consensus?

Corruption allegations have, perhaps unfortunately, become a common issue in investment arbitration and tribunals are taking an increasingly active role in dealing with them. While the legal status and the standards of proof applicable to such corruption allegations have been widely discussed, it has not been clearly established as to what tribunals will do on a practical and procedural level. This article examines how tribunals deal with this aspect of corruption allegations, particularly in light of two recent cases, Niko Resources v. Bangladesh and Metal-Tech v. Uzbekistan, assessing whether the current body of precedents is sufficient to provide a party or a tribunal with procedural predictability and provide certainty on their position in respect of corruption, including in relation to potential parallel domestic court proceedings. While there are examples of tribunals applying various different practices, there does appear to be a developing trend that suggests that tribunals are increasingly willing to be involved in the procedure and decision-making processes surrounding such allegations.