Algorithmic Decision-Making and the Legitimacy of Arbitral Justice
Toward a Multilevel Framework of Normative Governance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52028/rbadr.v8.i15.ART08.PERKeywords:
International Arbitration, Artificial Intelligence, Epistemic Translation, Cognitive Capture, Data ColonialismAbstract
The integration of artificial intelligence into international commercial arbitration has engendered a structural fracture between legal rationality, grounded in normative justification, and the statistical logic of algorithms, based on opaque correlations. This epistemic tension compromises the arbitrator’s agency and erodes the legitimacy of the arbitral award, particularly in the absence of regulatory frameworks capable of translating algorithmic outputs into legal reasons. The objective of this research is to design a multilevel normative model that enables such epistemic translation by articulating protocols for counterfactual explainability, substantive audits of normative biases, and interoperability standards to safeguard legal diversity against algorithmic homogenization. The findings enable the reconstruction of arbitral deliberation as an autonomous rational practice, even within AI-assisted contexts. It is concluded that human oversight is legally effective only when integrating normative mechanisms that guarantee the rational controllability of the award, thus configuring a pluralistic technological governance compliant with transnational procedural public policy.
References
ALEXY, Robert. Teoría de la argumentación jurídica: la teoría del discurso racional como teoría de la fundamentación jurídica. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales, 1989.
BREKOULAKIS, Stavros. International Arbitration and the Public-Private Divide. Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, London, v. 85, n. 4, p. 475-501, 2019.
COULDRY, Nick; MEJIAS, Ulises A. The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2019.
DARADKEH, Lafi. The applicability of New York Convention of 1958 on artificial intelligence arbitral award: exploring controversies through mapping and seeking interpretation to enhance coordination. Scientific Culture, Athens, v. 11, n. 3.1, p. 1-9, 2025. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11032501.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Law’s Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986.
HAQUE, AKM Bahalul; ISLAM, A.K.M. Najmul; MIKALEF, Patrick. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) from a user perspective: A synthesis of prior literature and problematizing avenues for future research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Amsterdam, v. 186, p. 1-15, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122120.
HILDEBRANDT, Mireille. Smart Technologies and the End(s) of Law: Novel Entanglements of Law and Technology. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015.
HUSSAIN, Mohammad Azam; LABANIEH, Mohamad Fateh; MAHDZIR, Nazli; SULAIMAN, Nooraini; BAWAZIR, Omar Saleh Abdullah. The potential prospect of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in arbitration from the international, national and Islamic perspectives. Journal of International Studies, Sintok, v. 19, n. 1, p. 95-122, 2023. https://doi.org/10.32890/jis2023.19.1.4.
LABANIEH, Mohamad Fateh; ALSHAMSI, Ahmed Abdulla Saif Saeed; AYUB, Zainal Amin; WAHAB, Harlida Abdul. The potential benefits of establishing an ai-arbitration legal framework in Malaysia. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, Uberaba, v. 7, p. 1-12, 2025. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2025171.
LENDVAI, Gergely Ferenc; GOSZTONYI, Gergely. Algorithmic Bias as a Core Legal Dilemma in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Conceptual Basis and the Current State of Regulation. Laws, Basel, v. 14, n. 3, p. 1-22, 2025. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14030041.
LEOFANTE, Francesco; AYOOBI, Hamed; DEJL, Adam; FREEDMAN, Gabriel; GORUR, Deniz; JIANG, Junqi; PAULINO-PASSOS, Guilherme; RAGO, Antonio; RAPBERGER, Anna; RUSSO, Fabrizio; YIN, Xiang; ZHANG, Dekai; TONI, Francesca. Contestable AI needs Computational Argumentation. In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING, 21., 2024, Hanoi. Proceedings [...]. Hanoi: KR, 2024. p. 1-10.
LóPEZ RODRÍGUEZ, Ana Mercedes. Eficacia transfronteriza de decisiones judiciales asistidas por inteligencia artificial en el Espacio Judicial Europeo. Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional, Madrid, v. 17, n. 2, p. 437-454, 2025. https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2025.9885.
MALEKELA, Mark-Silas A. AI and Confidentiality protection in International Commercial Arbitration: Analysis of the existing legal framework. Discover Artificial Intelligence, Cham, v. 5, n. 1, p. 1-18, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00316-7.
MARTÍNEZ QUINTANILLA, Javier Antonio. International Arbitration & Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities, Challenges, and Evolving Regulations. Santa Clara Journal of International Law, Santa Clara, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1-22, 2026. https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/scujil/vol24/iss1/1.
MIGLIORINI, Sara; MOREIRA, João Ilhão. Clashing Frameworks: the EU AI Act and Arbitration. European Journal of Risk Regulation, Cambridge, v. 16, n. 1, p. 1-21, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2025.10043.
PASQUALE, Frank. The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2015.
QUINTÃO, Heider Cristian Moura; DIAS, Murillo de Oliveira. Artificial Intelligence in Arbitration: Opportunities and Regulatory Challenges. Archives of Business Research, New York, v. 13, n. 9, p. 55-68, 2025. https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.1309.19370.
REN, Qiang; DU, Jing. Harmonizing innovation and regulation: The EU Artificial Intelligence Act in the international trade context. Computer Law & Security Review, Amsterdam, v. 54, p. 1-15, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106028.
SCHERER, Maxi. Artificial Intelligence and Legal Decision-Making: The Wide Open? Study on the Example of International Arbitration. Queen Mary University of London, School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper, London, n. 318, p. 1-54, 2019a. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3392669.
SCHERER, Maxi. International Arbitration 3.0: How Artificial Intelligence Will Change Dispute Resolution. In: KLAUSEGGER, Christian; KLEIN, Peter; KREMSLEHNER, Florian; PETSCHE, Alexander; PITKOWITZ, Nikolaus; WELSER, Irene; ZEILER, Gerold (eds.). Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration 2019. Viena: MANZ’sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung, 2019b. p. 503-514. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3377234.
SILICON VALLEY ARBITRATION & MEDIATION CENTER (SVAMC). SVAMC Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Arbitration. Palo Alto, CA: Silicon Valley Arbitration & Mediation Center, 2024. https://svamc.org/svamc-publishes-guidelines-on-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-in-arbitration/.
SKITKA, Linda J.; MOSIER, Kathleen; BURDICK, Mark. Does automation bias decision-making? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Amsterdam, v. 51, n. 5, p. 991-1006, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1999.0252.
TEUBNER, Gunther. Law as an Autopoietic System. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1993.
WACHTER, Sandra; MITTELSTADT, Brent; RUSSELL, Chris. Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Cambridge, MA, v. 31, n. 2, p. 841-887, 2017.
ZUBOFF, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Revista Brasileira de Alternative Dispute Resolution - Brazilian Journal of Alternative Dispute Resolution - RBADR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
No royalties or other compensation shall be due for the publication of the works.
The opinions expressed by the authors of the articles and reviews are their sole responsibility.
