Attorney General Calls for Rethink on India’s Arbitration Framework
Attorney General for India, R Venkataramani, has urged for a change in the narrative around India’s arbitration framework, emphasizing the need to stop the persistent criticism. Speaking at the India-Singapore Legal Bridge event during Singapore Convention Week 2026, Venkataramani highlighted how discussions often focus on the deficiencies of India’s legal system. “I have attended several conferences about arbitration law in India. I feel that the frequent ‘India-bashing’ should cease,” he stated. “Without understanding the internal workings, it’s easy to be critical from an external perspective.”
The Need for Legal Modernization
Venkataramani also cautioned against complacency, stressing the importance of modernizing India’s laws and dispute-resolution mechanisms. He advocated for reforms that surpass mere amendments and procedural tweaks, calling for a comprehensive overhaul to address new investment and technological challenges. “We cannot cling to outdated traditions,” he remarked.
Revisiting Contract Law
In a bold move, the Attorney General questioned the adequacy of traditional contract law for contemporary commercial relationships. “It’s time we bid a decent farewell to our existing contract law,” he suggested, proposing a global cooperation legislation. He indicated that countries like India, Singapore, and the United Kingdom could explore this framework together.
Collaboration Over Competition
Praising Singapore’s efforts to streamline dispute resolutions, Venkataramani proposed collaboration between India and Singapore, highlighting the potential benefits over viewing each other as competing arbitration hubs.
Justice Manmohan on India’s Arbitration Credibility
Supreme Court Justice Manmohan, who also spoke at the event, echoed the sentiments of progress in India’s arbitration scene. He noted significant legislative reforms, particularly the 2015 amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which narrowed the previously broad public policy ground and improved the arbitration timeline. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Company Limited v. National Highways Authority of India, he remarked, “India is now a credible seat of arbitration.”
Challenges and Opportunities in Arbitration
Justice Manmohan discussed India’s positive movement in arbitration speed, interim measures, and award enforceability. He noted that Indian courts are now expected to leave substantive issues to arbitral tribunals while providing interim relief, as seen in the Amazon-Future Group dispute. However, he acknowledged enforcement remains a challenge, the “elephant in the room,” yet noted improvements as courts require upfront deposits, reducing prolonged challenges to arbitral awards. “This is leading to faster award enforcement,” he stated.
Concerns Over Representation in SIAC
Justice Manmohan also raised concerns about the representation of Indian lawyers in the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) tribunals. Despite India contributing a significant number of references, Indian lawyers secured only a fraction of tribunal seats. “This isn’t a complaint, but a call for tapping into India’s talented Bar,” he concluded.
