ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PRACTICES IN PAKISTAN AND IRAQ WITH COMPARISON TO U.K

Abstract

International commercial arbitration has become a central mechanism for resolving cross-border commercial disputes, but its effectiveness ultimately depends on the predictability and enforceability of arbitral awards within national legal systems. This article comparatively examines the recognition and enforcement of international commercial arbitral awards in Pakistan and Iraq, using the United Kingdom as a benchmark for evaluating arbitration-friendly judicial and legislative practices. Drawing on statutory frameworks, relevant judicial decisions, international conventions, and practical enforcement considerations, the study identifies the principal legal and institutional factors affecting the effectiveness of arbitration in the three jurisdictions. The analysis finds that Pakistan has made significant progress through the Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreements and Foreign Arbitral Awards) Act 2011 (REFA), particularly by incorporating the principles of the 1958 New York Convention into its enforcement framework. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this framework is constrained by judicial delays, inconsistent application of arbitration law, institutional weaknesses, and the relatively broad use of public policy considerations. Iraq faces more fundamental structural limitations. Its arbitration regime remains embedded in Articles 251–276 of the 1969 Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure and lacks a comprehensive, modern arbitration statute. Iraq's non-membership of the New York Convention further complicates the international enforcement of arbitral awards, although the Riyadh Convention provides a limited regional mechanism for reciprocal enforcement. The comparative analysis demonstrates that the United Kingdom's pro-enforcement judicial approach, restrictive interpretation of public policy, procedural consistency, and mature arbitral institutions contribute substantially to legal certainty and investor confidence. The article argues that Pakistan should prioritize judicial consistency, institutional strengthening, and reduction of unnecessary judicial intervention, while Iraq requires comprehensive legislative modernization and closer alignment with international arbitration standards. The study concludes that predictable enforcement regimes are essential to strengthening confidence in arbitration, facilitating international commerce, and attracting foreign investment.