WWaasshhiinnggttoonn aanndd LLeeee UUnniivveerrssiittyy SScchhooooll ooff LLaaww WWaasshhiinnggttoonn aanndd LLeeee UUnniivveerrssiittyy SScchhooooll ooff LLaaww SScchhoollaarrllyy CCoommmmoonnss Scholarly Articles Faculty Scholarship 2015 TThhee DDiivveerrssiittyy CChhaalllleennggee:: EExxpplloorriinngg tthhee ""IInnvviissiibbllee CCoolllleeggee"" ooff IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall AArrbbiittrraattiioonn Susan D. Franck Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlufac Part of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Susan D. Franck, et al, The Diversity Challenge: Exploring the "Invisible College" of International Arbitration, 53 Colum. J. Transnat'l L. 429 (2015). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Washington and Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles by an authorized administrator of Washington and Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Articles The Diversity Challenge: Exploring the “Invisible College” of International Arbitration SUSAN D. FRANCK, JAMES FREDA, KELLEN LAVIN, TOBIAS LEHMANN & ANNE VAN AAKEN* As diversity can affect the perceived legitimacy of a state’s dispute resolution system and the quality of *Susan D. Franck is a Professor of Law, Washington & Lee University School of Law (W&L). James Freda is currently a Human Rights Officer in the United Nations Office of the Special Representative to the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict; and the views expressed in this Article are solely those of the author and not those of the United Nations or its Member States. Kellen Lavin holds his J.D. from Washington & Lee University School of Law (2013). Tobias Lehmann is a Ph.D. Candidate, University of St. Gallen with an M.A. in Law and Economics, University of St. Gallen, and M.Sc. in Economics, University of Lausanne. Anne van Aaken is the Professor of Law and Economics, Legal Theory, Public International Law, and European Law, University of St. Gallen. The authors would like to thank José Alvarez, Mark Drumbl, Franco Ferrari, Samuel Gaertner, Jean Galbraith, Nienke Grossman, Meg Kinnear, Shashank Kumar, Sean Murphy, Jide Nzelibe, Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Jeffrey Rachlinski, W. Michael Reisman, Catherine Rogers, Cecily Rose, Paul Stephan, Todd Weiler, and David Zaring for their insights on earlier drafts. This Article has benefitted from workshops at the American Society of International Law (ASIL) Research Forum, the ASIL Junior International Law Scholars Association, the Academic Council of the Institute for Transnational Arbitration, and the University of Delaware’s Center for the Study of Diversity. The authors express gratitude to the ICCA Miami Congress host committee for providing logistical and financial support to the research team, the Congress’s program committee for allowing us to perform our survey and all participants who took the research seriously and gave generously of their time. We are grateful to Lucy Reed who was bold enough to support our unusual research. The authors express their appreciation of the diligent assistance of talented W&L students, namely Trista Bishop-Watt, Krista Haab, Stephen Halpin, Sharon Jeong, Rachael Kurzweil, George Mackie, Bret Marfut, and Krystal Swendsboe. Stephanie Miller and the W&L Law Library provided coding assistance. The W&L Frances Lewis Law Center, W&L Transnational Law Institute, and the University of St. Gallen Law School provided research support. Finally, we thank John Barkett for the use of Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP’s Miami office for compiling initial results. 430 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW [53:429 judicial decisions, diversity levels in the national bench and bar have been an area of transnational concern. By contrast, little is known about diversity of adjudicators and counsel in international arbitration. With a lack of accurate, complete, and publicly available data about international arbitrators and practitioners, speculation about membership in the “invisible college” of international arbitration abounds. Using data from a survey of attendees at the prestigious and elite biennial Congress of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration permitted one glimpse into the membership of the international arbitration community. Although defining the international arbitration community is challenging, rather than leave the “invisible college” unexamined, this Article offers one systematic glimpse into the global elites of international arbitration using data from 413 subjects who served as counsel and 262 who acted as arbitrators (including 67 investment treaty arbitrators). The median international arbitrator was a fifty-three year old man who was a national of a developed state reporting ten arbitral appointments; and the median counsel was a forty-six year old man who was a national of a developed state and had served as counsel in fifteen arbitrations. In addition: (1) 17.6% of the arbitrators were women, and there was a significant age difference such that male arbitrators were approximately ten years older than women; (2) for those acting as international arbitrators, we could not identify a significant difference in the number of appointments women and men obtained; (3) depending upon how development status was defined, developing world arbitrators accounted for fifteen to twenty percent of arbitrators; and (4) for all measures used to analyze development status, arbitrators from the developing world received a statistically lower number of appointments than their developed world counterparts. Recognizing the data revealed diversity in international arbitration is a complex phenomenon, the data nevertheless supported, rather than disproved, claims that international arbitration is a relatively homogenous group. Acknowledging that international arbitration may improve over time and diversity issues challenge other forms of dispute resolution, diversity levels in 2015] THE DIVERSITY CHALLENGE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 431 international arbitration were somewhat lower than in several national court systems but were generally reflective of diversity levels in other international courts and tribunals. The international arbitration community seems aware of the distortions. For all subjects, 57.5% either somewhat or strongly agreed that international arbitration experiences challenges related to gender, nationality, or age. Younger subjects and women were statistically more likely to identify such challenges as compared to older or male subjects; but subjects from states outside the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) were less likely to identify challenges when compared to their OECD counterparts. Replication is necessary as the results may reflect a limited historical baseline of international arbitration global elites. Given the self- identified concerns and the symbolic legitimacy of broader representation, the international arbitration community may wish to explore factors inhibiting full utilization of untapped talent and facilitate aims of procedural, and potentially distributive, justice. Structural and incremental strategies could then promote a sustainable international arbitration system for the future. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 432   I. THE “INVISIBLE COLLEGE” OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION ..... 435   II. THE DATA AND METHODOLOGY .................................................. 440   III. THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION ........... 446   A. Experience Related to International Arbitration ...... 446   B. Experience as International Arbitrators ................... 449   C. Gender, Age, Legal Training, Native Language, and Nationality of International Arbitrators and Counsel ..................................................................... 451   D. Key Findings ............................................................ 465   IV. PERCEIVED DIVERSITY CHALLENGES ......................................... 467   A. Contextualizing the Demographics of Diversity ...... 470   B. More Relative Success with Diversity ..................... 471   C. Less Relative Success with Diversity ...................... 476   D. Self-Reflection on the “Invisible College’s” 432 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW [53:429 Perceived Diversity Levels ....................................... 480   V. EXPERIENCED DIVERSITY PROBLEMS .......................................... 486   A. Gender and Development: Variations in Frequency of Appointments ..................................... 486   B. Arbitrators’ Experiences with Diversity .................. 489   C. Counsel’s Experiences with Diversity ..................... 492   VI. DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 495   VII. LIMITATIONS ............................................................................ 501   CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 502   INTRODUCTION In 1977, Oscar Schachter referred to “The Invisible College of International Lawyers” to describe the elite professional community of professors, students, government officials, civil servants, and practitioners silently influencing international law.1 At that moment in history, little was known about those involved in the “Invisible College” of the global international arbitration community. Since then, with the classic socio-legal study by Yves Dezalay and Bryant Garth,2 tranches of discrete information published by arbitral institutions and the recent work of some empirical scholars, we have begun to uncover a degree of information about key actors in international arbitration. José Alvarez has described the “democratization of the invisible college.”3 There is, however, still a 1. Oscar Schachter, The Invisible College of International Lawyers, 72 NW. U. L. REV. 217, 217 (1977); see also DIANA CRANE, INVISIBLE COLLEGES: DIFFUSION OF KNOWLEDGE IN SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITIES (1972). 2. YVES DEZALAY & BRYANT G. GARTH, DEALING IN VIRTUE: INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRANSNATIONAL LEGAL ORDER (1996); see also DANIEL TERRIS ET AL., THE INTERNATIONAL JUDGE: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO DECIDE THE WORLD’S CASES (2007) (conducting a similar process to interview thirty international judges to offer a portrait of the public international law judiciary); Thomas Schultz & Robert Kovacs, The Rise of a Third Generation of Arbitrators? Fifteen Years After Dezalay and Garth, 28 ARB. INT’L 161 (2012) (updating the scholarship of Dezalay & Garth); Maya Steinitz, Transnational Legal Process Theories, in THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL ADJUDICATION 339, 350–52 (Cesare P.R. Romano et al. eds., 2013) (discussing the “invisible college” of international arbitration). But see Catherine A. Rogers, Gulliver’s Troubled Travels, or the Conundrum of Comparative Law, 67 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 149, 153, 166–68 (1997) (identifying concerns related to the methodology of Dezalay and Garth). 3. Jose E. Alvarez, The Democratization of the Invisible College, AM. SOC’Y INT’L L. 2015] THE DIVERSITY CHALLENGE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 433 dearth of empirical data that cuts across arbitration institutions and subject matter to explore the identities of those involved in the “invisible college” of international arbitration. To bring further transparency to the “invisible college,” this Article addresses the gap within the literature to offer demographic data about members of the global community of international arbitration lawyers.4 The International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) provided us with unprecedented access to their biennial Congress in 2014 to assess the international arbitration community empirically. Our objective was to generate data using verifiable social science methods to test others’ theories and our own assumptions with the hope of improving international dispute settlement. I.L. POST: PRESIDENT’S COLUMN (Nov. 8, 2007), available at http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/ default/files/ECM_PRO_065334.pdf; see also CATHERINE ROGERS, ETHICS IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (2014) (discussing the “invisible college” of international arbitration); David Kennedy, The Politics of the Invisible College: International Governance and the Politics of Expertise, 5 EUR. HUM. RTS. L. REV. 463 (2001); Sergio Puig, Social Capital in the Arbitration Marketplace, 25 EUR. J. INT’L L. 387 (2014) (identifying a network effect among ICSID arbitrators). 4. Queen Mary University has worked with several partners, including White & Case and PriceWaterhouseCoopers, to elucidate international arbitration through surveys and interviews. See, e.g., PAUL FRIEDLAND & STAVROS BREKOULAKIS, WHITE & CASE AND QUEEN MARY, UNIV. OF LONDON, 2012 INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION SURVEY: CURRENT AND PREFERRED PRACTICES IN THE ARBITRAL PROCESS (2012), http://annualreview 2012.whitecase.com/International_Arbitration_Survey_2012.pdf [hereinafter White & Case/Queen Mary University of London Survey]; PAUL FRIEDLAND & LOUKAS MISTELIS, WHITE & CASE AND QUEEN MARY, UNIV. OF LONDON, 2010 INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION SURVEY: CHOICES IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION (2010), http://www.whitecase.com/ files/upload/fileRepository/2010-International-Arbitration-Survey-Choices-International- Arbitration.pdf; GERRY LAGERBERG & LOUKAS MISTELIS, PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS & QUEEN MARY, UNIV. OF LONDON, CORPORATE CHOICES IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION: INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVES (2013), https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/arbitration-dispute- resolution/assets/pwc-international-arbitration-study.pdf. Benjamin Davis has conducted preliminary research related to diversity of international arbitrators within the United States. See Benjamin G. Davis, American Diversity in International Arbitration 2003–2013 (Pre- Publication Draft) (Univ. of Toledo Research Studies, Paper No. 2014-03, 2013), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2364967. Recent research by Tom Stipanowich also provides empirical perspectives on international arbitration, including aspects related to diversity. See Thomas J. Stipanowich, Reflections on the State and Future of Commercial Arbitration: Challenges, Opportunities, Proposals, 25 AM. REV. INT’L ARB. (forthcoming 2015), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2519084 (identifying roughly fifteen percent of a sample of international arbitrators as women and exploring the literature related to gender diversity in international arbitration); Thomas Stipanowich & J. Ryan Lamare, Living with “ADR”: Evolving Perceptions and Use of Mediation, Arbitration and Conflict Management in Fortune 1,000 Corporations, 19 HARV. NEGOT. L. REV. 1 (2013) (conducting empirical research on international commercial arbitration). 434 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW [53:429 At the start of the 2014 ICCA Congress, Jan Paulsson argued that internal reflection and debate should encourage the improvement of international arbitration. Within two weeks of the Congress and our experiment, V.V. Veeder asked the international arbitration community “to act now to regulate itself or risk ‘reputational disaster’”5 and encouraged the use of data to begin that process.6 The twin observations from Veeder and Paulsson underscore the importance of the research and the initial findings offered in this Article. Whereas historic divides in international arbitration mirrored Cold War rifts between east and west,7 our data demonstrated that two gaps within international arbitration involve development status and gender. Recognizing that there are diversity challenges in dispute resolution generally8 and that there have been arguable shifts since Dezalay and Garth’s original scholarship,9 international arbitration stands poised to engage in self-reflection and develop strategies for the future. This Article first examines the existing literature to identify what was historically known about the “invisible college” of international arbitration. Part II then provides the methodology and explains the data collection procedures. Part III identifies core subject demographics with a focus on the identity of arbitrators and counsel. Parts IV and V then explore how subjects perceived their own experiences with diversity and then contrast those assessments against subjects’ actual experience. Part VI then considers the normative implications for legitimacy. Part VII acknowledges the limitations of the analyses. The Article concludes the data raise two important questions, namely: what the appropriate baseline is for examining the experiences of international arbitration and how the arbitration community wishes to respond. Given the international arbitration community’s acknowledgement of diversity concerns, it would be constructive to identify factors impeding or preventing the maximization of untapped arbitration talent. Recognizing the need to 5. Leo Szolnoki, London: Veeder Backs Paulsson’s Call to Self-Regulate, 9 GLOBAL ARB. REV. (Mar. 27, 2014), available at http://globalarbitrationreview.com/journal/ article/32528/london-veeder-backs-paulssons-call-self-regulate. 6. Id. 7. V.V. Veeder, Remarks at the ICCA 50th Anniversary Banquet, 3 (May 19, 2011), available at http://www.arbitration-icca.org/media/0/13087101785130/v.v._veeder_speach. pdf. 8. See infra Part IV (exploring diversity challenges in national courts and international tribunals). 9. DEZALAY & GARTH, supra note 2. 2015] THE DIVERSITY CHALLENGE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 435 retain quality without unduly burdening party autonomy, there is value in identifying diversity opportunities and capacity building to promote justice-facilitating objectives and build a sustainable international arbitration system for the future. I. THE “INVISIBLE COLLEGE” OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION There is a lack of empirical evidence about the identity of actors in international arbitration, particularly those who actually serve or might serve as arbitrators. Some websites and arbitration organizations offer a degree of information about potential arbitrators. For example, the International Arbitration Institute10 and Arbitral Women11 have websites where one can search through biographies of registered arbitrators. Institutions like the American Arbitration Association’s International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), and the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) also maintain a general roster or database of people willing to serve as international arbitrators.12 Other commercial services distribute lists of arbitration experts.13 Despite this general information on those who could theoretically serve as arbitrators, there is no centralized public repository providing information about individuals who have actually served as 10. See Search the IAI Directory, INT’L ARB. INST. PARIS, http://www.iaiparis.com/ drm_search.asp (last visited May 16, 2015). 11. See Find a Practitioner, ARBITRAL WOMEN, http://www.arbitralwomen.com/ index.aspx?sectionlinks_id=7&language=0&pageName=MemberSearch (last visited May 16, 2015). 12. Raymond G. Bender, Jr., Three Practical Steps to Avoid an Erroneous Arbitration, 30 ALTERNATIVES TO HIGH COST LITIGATION 155 (Int’l Inst. for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, 2012). 13. For example, Who’s Who Legal has a yearly compendium of Commercial Arbitration identifying the most highly regarded firms and individuals that requires participants to be nominated by peers. Most Highly Regarded Firms: Commercial Arbitration 2013, WHO’S WHO LEGAL (Nov. 2012), available at http://whoswholegal.com/news/analysis/article/30104/most-highly-regarded-firms- commercial-arbitration-2013/. Chambers & Partners identifies firms—and individuals within those firms—as having elite arbitration expertise and the Global Arbitration Review generates an index identifying top entities. Nationwide: International Arbitration, CHAMBERS & PARTNERS, available at http://www.chambersandpartners.com/12788/ 738/editorial/5/1 (last visited May 16, 2015); GAR 100—7th Edition, GLOBAL ARB. R. (Jan. 1, 2014), available at http://globalarbitrationreview.com/surveys/survey/948/gar-100-7th- edition. 436 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW [53:429 arbitrators that would permit one to identify and analyze core demographic information about international arbitrators.14 Where institutions have the internal capacity to gather and analyze the data on their own arbitrators, their publicized data focus on basic information about arbitrator nationality. Beyond information published in Chambers and Partners, Global Arbitration Review, or the International Bar Association’s Who’s Who of Commercial Arbitration,15 there is little information available on the background, experience, and identities of the international arbitration bar. As such, it is perhaps unsurprising that international arbitration functions as a classic “invisible college.” Given the lack of holistic information,16 identifying who acts as counsel or arbitrator can only be assessed by considering major international institutions on a case-by-case basis. This section therefore reviews information about arbitrators from institutions including the ICC,17 LCIA, Singapore International Arbitration 14. Catherine Rogers recommends providing publicly available information about arbitrators, or what she refers to as “Arbitrator Intelligence.” Catherine A. Rogers & Alex Wiker, Piloting Arbitrator Intelligence, KLUWER ARB. BLOG (Apr. 10, 2014), http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/blog/author/catherinerogers; see also Catherine A. Rogers, Fit and Function in Legal Ethics: Developing a Code of Conduct for International Arbitration, 23 MICH. J. INT’L L. 341 (2002); Catherine A. Rogers, Regulating International Arbitrators: A Functional Approach to Developing Standards of Conduct, 41 STAN. J. INT’L L. 53 (2005); Hans Smit, The Future of International Commercial Arbitration: A Single Transnational Institution?, 25 COLUM. J. TRANSNAT’L L. 9, 30–32 (1986). Professor Rogers launched and, in January 2015, completed a pilot program to gather arbitrator information. See ARBITRATOR INTELLIGENCE, http://www.arbitratorintelligence.org (last visited May 16, 2015). 15. See, e.g., Arbitrator Profiles, INVESTMENT ARB. REP., http://www.iareporter.com/ categories/profiles (last visted May 16, 2015); GAR 45 Under 45 2011-Introduction, 6 GLOBAL ARB. REV. (Aug. 11, 2011), available at http://globalarbitrationreview.com/ surveys/article/29699/%20gar45452011introduction; Michael Goldhaber, Arbitration Scorecard 2013, AM. LAW. (June 24, 2013), http://www.americanlawyer.com/ id=1202608198051/ArbitrationScorecard2013?slreturn=20150225152802; see also Sebastian Perry, Portrait of the Arbitrator, 9 GLOBAL ARB. REV. (May 6, 2014), http://globalarbitrationreview.com/news/article/32586/portraitarbitrator; Catherine A. Rogers, The Vocation of the International Arbitrator, 20 AM. U. INT’L L. REV. 957 (2005). 16. Arbitral institutions may wish to collaborate in creating this type of information and making it freely available to the public. See infra note 86 and accompanying text. 17. For another ICCA Congress session, the ICC reported that “[i]n 2002, there were 660 individuals from 62 countries fulfilling arbitral appointments in ICC arbitration, whereas in 2012 the numbers increased to 847 individuals from 72 countries.” Draft Responses of John Beechey, 2014 ICCA Congress Panel B-2 Questionnaire, Response to Question 2 (on file with ICCA), available at http://www.arbitration-icca.org/conferences-and-congresses/ miamiprogramme.html. The ICC also noted some demographic shifts in party location and places of arbitration over the past decade, stating that “whereas the percentage of parties 2015] THE DIVERSITY CHALLENGE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 437 Centre (SIAC), and ICSID and focuses on the nationality information they have made available to the public.18 We are unaware of any demographic information on counsel, whether based upon nationality or otherwise, provided by arbitration institutions. The LCIA reported that, in 2012, it had 265 new arbitrations. Of those cases, 52.6% of arbitrators were purely nationals from the United Kingdom.19 As the rate of U.K. arbitrators at the LCIA was roughly sixty-one percent in 2005,20 descriptively, this decrease in from Africa, Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe, and South East Asia increased from 38.3% to 46.9% between 2003 and 2012 (i.e., a 22% increase), the percentage of places of arbitration located in those regions within the same period increased from 15.6% to 25.3% (i.e., a 62% increase).” Id. at Response to Question 1. 18. We were unable to locate demographic data on the websites or elsewhere for the ICDR, but parties can pay US$750 for a list of five potential arbitrators. Arbitrator and Mediator Selection, AM. ARB. ASS’N, https://www.adr.org/aaa/faces/arbitratorsmediators/ arbitratormediatorselection?_afrLoop=1497714073611632&_afrWindowMode=0&_afrWin dowId=12kiedkwei_1#%40%3F_afrWindowId%3D12kiedkwei_1%26_afrLoop%3D149771 4073611632%26_afrWindowMode%3D0%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D12kiedkwei_55 (last visited May 16, 2015). We were unable to locate arbitrator information from other institutions including the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, the Kigali International Arbitration Centre, the Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration, the Center for Arbitration and Mediation of the Chamber of Commerce Brazil-Canada, or the Dubai International Arbitration Centre. There is some data suggesting that the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) keeps track of the nationality of arbitrators, primarily by virtue of a listing process, albeit with mixed success in achieving diversity and results. Compare Jonathan H. Zimmerman, When Dealing with Chinese Entities, Avoid the CIETAC Arbitration Process, 53 ADVOC. 23, 23 (Idaho State Bar, 2010) (“CIETAC has been in existence since 1956, and boast [sic] that it has 274 foreign arbitrators (not Chinese Nationals) of its 969 listed arbitrators. Even with the foreign arbitrators, this method of arbitration is [sic] disagreeable prospect with foreign or North American companies; especially if you have experienced it.”), with Sarah R. MacLean, CIETAC, From Underdog to Role Model: Bringing the ICC Back to the Forefront in the Field of International Arbitration, 16 GONZ. J. INT’L L. 62, 72-73 (2012) (observing that CIETAC chairs are primarily Chinese nationals, U.S. parties’ win rates are roughly equal to cases lost and outcomes for parties involving other states—like Germany and Australia—has been fairly similar). 19. See LCIA, REGISTRAR’S REPORT 4 (2012), available at http://www.lcia.org/LCIA/reports.aspx (observing that for the 344 total appointments in 2012, 181 were exclusively U.K. nationals, and that of those, parties appointed 84, the LCIA Court appointed 73 and co-arbitrators appointed 24; the remaining 144 appointments were “Australian; Austrian; Bahraini; Bangladeshi; Belgian; Brazilian; Canadian; Colombian; Czech; Dutch; Egyptian; French; German; Greek; Indian; Irish; Lebanese; Maltese; New Zealand; Nigerian; Peruvian; Portuguese; Russian; Singaporean; South African; Swedish; Swiss; and U.S.,” but nineteen 19 were U.K. dual nationals, which means that 200 appointees were U.K. nationals or dual nationals for a total U.K. appointment rate of 58.1%). 20. See LCIA, DIRECTOR GENERAL’S REVIEW OF 2005 at 3 (2005), available at http://www.lcia.org/LCIA/reports.aspx (observing that 57 arbitrators appointed by the