DIGITAL JUSTICE AND THE UNCITRAL ODR FRAMEWORK: NORMATIVE FOUNDATIONS, INSTITUTIONAL LIMITS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Abstract

Cross-border digital trades are now being conducted at unprecedented dimensions. But they are also simultaneously generating new dimensions of complex cross-border disputes. Consequently, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), an essential component of digital justice, is being increasingly employed as a way of resolving cross-border disputes electronically. While the UNCITRAL has made significant contributions through establishing the normative foundations for e-commerce and ODR, there still exist many issues about how well suited is the governance model of UNCITRAL to deal with the increasing decentralisation of the digital economy. This paper assesses critically UNCITRAL's contribution to international ODR governance by assessing its normative foundations, institutional limitations, and potential role as a catalyst for digital justice. The study employed a qualitative doctrinal method, and a fair comparative approach, in assessing UNCITRAL's primary legal documents relating to ODR and the institutional experiences associated with the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), the EU Framework of ODR, and several private ODR service providers. Research indicated that while UNCITRAL was successful in developing internationally accepted legal principles for both e-commerce and ODR, it continues to be hampered institutionally through lack of authority over ODR institutions, reliance on voluntary compliance with soft law, and inability to address technology-related issues. Ultimately, this research found that an integrated governance model that combines UNCITRAL's normative influence with enhanced institutional coordination and cooperation among regional public authorities, alongside relevant private sector entities, provides a better mechanism for resolving cross border digital disputes.