Why I Pursue International Arbitration?
In my previous article, I explained why I chose not to pursue a US bar license. In this one, you will find my attitude toward international arbitration to be quite the opposite.
More importantly, I hold a background in science and engineering. Before practising law, I engaged in scientific research and technical work. The belief that “technology knows no borders” is deeply rooted within me. Even as I work in cross-border legal practice, I have no wish to hop between different national legal systems. My original aspiration is to remove legal barriers for cross-border technology transactions and facilitate unimpeded global technology trade.
That explains why I committed myself to international arbitration without hesitation when I first encountered this field — a stark contrast to my deliberations over whether to pursue the California Bar. International arbitration perfectly aligns with my professional mission: linking global technology trade and empowering cross-border commercial cooperation.
Every country maintains its own independent set of legal rules. These separate legal jurisdictions resemble isolating walls, obstructing global business flows and generating numerous trade risks and extra transaction costs.
In 1958, the New York Convention laid the foundation for the enforcement of cross-border arbitral awards. To further eliminate legal barriers between nations and unify global trade rules, the United Nations established the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) in 1966. Its core mission is straightforward: to harmonise and unify trade laws worldwide so that countries with different systems can conduct stable, predictable international trade.
For a long time, differences among national legal systems have created substantial uncertainty. Cross-border disputes are hard to resolve, and rulings are difficult to enforce. This is the fundamental reason why the United Nations has consistently promoted the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. Its core vision is to create a neutral, universal dispute resolution mechanism adaptable to diverse legal, social and economic systems across the globe, supporting sound trade and cooperation between nations.
To my mind, this captures the core value of international arbitration, and it coincides with my original aspiration as an intellectual property lawyer specialising in the technology sector.
Different jurisdictions are separate walls, while arbitration serves as a bridge breaking down barriers and connecting all parties. It bridges disparate legal systems, reconciles conflicting rules and clears obstacles for global trade. In terms of professional ideals, I do not want to be confined behind one single wall as a practitioner limited to one jurisdiction’s laws. I hope to stand between these barriers, leveraging international arbitration as a tool to become a connector linking global technology and worldwide intellectual property.