By Abigél Farkas, THUAS Student and incoming intern at IMI.
On 10 June 2025, leading organizations and experts at the forefront of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) gathered at the historic Peace Palace in The Hague to explore how digital innovation can enhance access to justice. The International Mediation Institute (IMI) is proud to participate in and continue supporting this important initiative.
What follows is a snapshot of the conference’s lively discussion on how artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionising the ADR landscape. From the keynote to the five engaging panels, this summary reflects on the insights and lessons learnt, aiming to carry the conversation beyond the walls of the Peace Palace.
The Keynote: The Importance of Adaptability in the Face of Change
The Permanent Court of Arbitration’s Secretary-General, Dr. Hab. Marcin Czepelak, gave a keynote address advocating for ethical innovation. He urged the legal community to re-examine traditional methods as technology becomes more integrated into legal procedures. He emphasised that there are significant responsibilities associated with the new opportunities brought about by AI tools, including agility, neutrality, and accountability. Technology is meant to support human judgment, not replace it.
Panel 1: Unleashing AI or Restraining It? A Counterpoint for Practitioners
The first panel, moderated by Sophie Nappert and featuring Elizabeth Meade, Reza Mohtashami, Dorothee Schramm and Anke Sessler, debated two propositions:
1) whether parties should disclose all use of GenAI in the preparation of submissions, expert reports, and factual evidence (failing which the submission or evidence will not form part of the record), and
2) whether tribunals should be required to use AI for all tasks other than the core tasks of the arbitrator, in compliance with their duty to conduct the arbitration in an efficient and cost-effective manner.
Regarding disclosure, opinions varied between those who argued for greater openness and others who cautioned about unnecessary procedural burdens. The second discussion focused on whether requiring the use of AI for operational tasks may streamline arbitration or run the danger of compromising arbitrators’ independence and expertise. The panel challenged the audience to reflect on how best to balance innovation with procedural integrity.
Panel 2: Engineering Ethical AI: Advancing & Defending Procedural Integrity in International Dispute Resolution
The second panel explored the ethical dimensions of AI in international dispute resolution. Kathleen Paisley led a discussion with Nino Sievi, Fernanda Flores, Anna Mills, and Stan Putter, on balancing confidentiality with transparency, in light of the EU AI Act, SVAMC Guidelines, and other global standards. Speakers reiterated that although AI can increase productivity and free lawyers for more strategic work, legal practitioners are ultimately responsible and professionally liable for its misuse. Ensuring efficient human oversight, mitigating automation bias, and assessing whether the transparency mechanisms in place are adequate to maintain trust were in the centre of the debate.
Panel 3: Wiping The Slate Clean: Re-Engineering Dispute Management to Drive Business Outcomes
In the third panel of the day, led by Eric Tuchmann, panelists Rebecca Anderson, Marine Assadollahi, Simon Leimbacker, and Migle Zukauskaite-Totore discussed how various legal departments approach AI. While the benefits (faster processes, lower costs, and smarter tools) are clear, the panel stressed that strong internal governance is essential for successful adoption. Effective implementation depends on getting an organisation’s “data house” in order and ensuring legal teams adapt to developing tools.
Panel 4: Contrast And Collaboration: The Dynamic Relationship Between International Mediation and Arbitration
The fourth panel, moderated by Steve Andersen (AAA-ICDR), brought together IMI Certified Mediator Michael Cover, Leonardo D’Urso (ADR Center, Rome), L.A. based lawyer Nathan O’Malley, and Colin Rule (ODR.com) to investigate how mediation and arbitration are interrelated. The speakers from Europe and the U.S. shared insights on AI, ODR, and mixed-mode processes. They emphasised how legislative frameworks like the Singapore Convention and the DSA may increase mediation’s role and noted the growing interest in preventive pre-dispute mediation. In order to make mediation a useful first step in resolving business disputes (rather than merely an afterthought), speakers encouraged increased education, process redesign, and institutional alignment.
IMI Vice Chair Leonardo D’Urso spoke about the importance of legislation and policy in the development of mediation culture, highlighting that the law made the culture in jurisdictions like Italy:
“Italy has been a laboratory for using different policy models. The first mediation meeting is like a condensed workshop – advantages of mediation within this specific case are explored with the mediator. After 15 years, still 80% of cases come from these first (nudged/required) meetings, and only 1% come from judges’ referrals.”
Panel 5: How Do We Get Comfortable with AI-Driven Decision-Making?
Is it ethical not to use AI today? This provocative question shaped the discussion of the final panel, moderated by Linda Beyea and joined by Peter Bekker, David Evans, Andrea Menaker, and Colin Rule. The panel explored whether AI could deliver fair decisions and how regulatory standards must evolve to address current legal gaps. The speakers also warned against over-reliance and highlighted the importance of explainable AI (XAI) to ensure traceability. A key point for consideration is to use AI, but only when it can be understood, justified, and trusted.
As technology continues to transform dispute resolution, the conference’s sessions provided clarity as to what lies ahead. All ADR experts have an obligation to stay up to date on new technologies, and events such as the AAA-ICDR Future Dispute Resolution Conference serve as a reminder of the value of cooperation and dialogue.
Thank you to the organisers for creating a space where new ideas and practical insights could meet. IMI is dedicated to supporting a future of dispute resolution that is both innovative and grounded in shared values of integrity, transparency, and trust.
We are especially grateful to Steve Andersen, IMI Board Member, for the opportunity to participate in these cutting-edge discussions and meet together as a team within the impressive setting of the Peace Palace.
