Samenvatting

The article is intended to give a view (shared by many) on how arbitrators could or maybe even should react when faced with misdeeds in an ongoing arbitration proceeding. The misdeeds meant in this article concern forgery and false witness testimonies that may fraudulently influence judgements. Not covered are questions related to illicit contracts (i.e. contracts induced by bribery or corruption).
The author contrasts the different views of an arbitrator’s role as either as a private dispute settler or as a person deriving his or her function also from the state as a guarantor of arbitration as a means to settle disputes. She comes to the conclusion that in the end, public policy consideration should overrule party autonomy and that, contrary to the current practice, tribunals faced with misdeeds during an arbitration should not hesitate to address this issue in the award.