WANG Guiguo

Dean of the Institute of International Strategy and Law, Zhejiang University

Senior Professor of Liberal Arts, Zhejiang University

President of the Belt and Road Research Institute of Hong Kong

I. Characteristics of the AI Era and Their Impact on International Commercial Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

Economic globalization has made the world an integrated, flat whole. The individuals, enterprises, institutions, national governments, intergovernmental organizations, non‑governmental organizations, and other actors participating in globalization together form a two‑dimensional space with that flat globalized world. The internet and information technology have added another dimension to this two‑dimensional globalization, turning it into a three‑dimensional space. Artificial intelligence (AI), as a direct participant in the globalization process, has further transformed this three‑dimensional space into a four‑dimensional one. This fourth dimension is not a physical dimension, but rather the dimension of intelligent feedback—meaning that AI is no longer merely a tool, but an important actor capable of participating in, evaluating, and even reshaping the flow of information in real time. This is the current state of globalization, and the fundamental characteristic of the AI era.

In this four‑dimensional space, the operating logic of international commercial activities has undergone profound changes. Information spreads much faster than before, and the costs of producing and transmitting information have fallen sharply. International supply chains and industrial chains are underpinned by cross‑border transactions, cross‑border payments, cross‑border transportation, and cross‑border services. A dispute arising at any link may, due to the accelerated dissemination of information, affect the judgment and confidence of market participants. More importantly, AI, as an assistant, has been accepted and widely used by an increasing number of people. Anyone can produce and disseminate information with the help of AI, giving information dissemination a truly universal character, what may be called public opinion. Almost any decision or policy must take public opinion into account, yet it is often difficult to stop the spread of that opinion. How to effectively grasp the characteristics of the AI era so as to navigate this tide with agility has become an unavoidable challenge for every institution and every individual, including courts and judges. For international commercial courts, the issue is not merely how to deal with AI itself, but more importantly, how to enhance the fairness, efficiency, and predictability of international commercial dispute resolution mechanisms in the AI era, so that dispute resolution can serve the stable development of international supply chains and industrial chains. 

II. Challenges Facing Courts and Judges

"All things carry the yin and embrace the yang" — everything has its advantages and disadvantages, and challenges are also accompanied with opportunities. In the AI era, parties to a case, with the assistance of AI, can evaluate a court's judgment or its interpretation of legal provisions and express their own views, regardless of whether they have a legal background. This creates pressure on judges and courts that did not previously exist. Once a judgment is rendered, the dissatisfied party can use AI to produce fairly professional‑looking videos seemingly expert commentaries, disseminate them via the internet, and inject them into the global torrent of public opinion, turning them into public opinion that combines professional and social concerns, which the relevant courts and judges need to respond to rationally. At the same time, the professional analysis and commentary from the overseas legal community can be viewed as a form of cross‑jurisdictional academic discussion and exchange of views. In such circumstances, an ordinary judgment may be placed under the magnifying glass of public opinion and subjected to scrutiny. Foreign legal professionals often comment on these judgments based on the laws of their own societies, and tend to overlook the differences in the application of laws among different jurisdictions. If a case involves foreign elements, the scrutiny of public opinion may encompass both overseas and domestic dimensions, and its content may expand from professional assessments to political considerations. 

International commercial disputes often involve different jurisdictions, different commercial practices, different transaction chains, and different market expectations, and they have particularities distinct from ordinary civil and commercial cases. If a judgment cannot respond to the core concerns of the parties in a timely, clear, and stable manner, it may cause a dispute in an individual case to escalate into transaction delays, credit impairment, and disruption of cooperation, thereby affecting the stability of the relevant supply chains and industrial chains. These judgments from different countries, having been tested by public opinion, are aggregated on the internet and become reference material for courts, arbitral tribunals, lawyers, and researchers across nations, thereby creating a situation of mutual influence. This also constitutes a silent challenge to courts and judges. On the other hand, precisely because judgments and awards can be observed, compared, and cited across national borders, international commercial courts are in a better position to enhance the predictability of international commercial dispute resolution mechanisms through high‑quality judicial reasoning, uniform adjudicative standards, and enhanced procedural transparency. 

III. Responding to the Challenges: Safeguarding Supply Chain and Industrial Chain Stability through Dispute Resolution Effectiveness

Faced with the challenges of the AI era of globalization, everyone can only embrace them; there is no way to avoid them. The same is true for courts and judges. At the same time, every disadvantage has its corresponding advantage. Hence, the challenges of the AI era are also opportunities. The rapid flow of information and the commentary of domestic and overseas public opinion also bring judgments quickly into the public eye, enabling people to understand the legal basis and reasoning behind them, thereby enhancing soft power. Given that all legal systems are rooted in the culture and traditions of their respective societies and reflect the values of those societies, a firm grasp of one's own traditional culture not only helps strengthen the legal foundation of judgments, but also becomes a distinctive national cultural and intellectual asset for direct and indirect exchanges with courts and judges from other countries. It can also be internalized as a source of value‑based resolve in responding to the judicial challenges of the AI era. 

Therefore, responding to the challenges of the AI era cannot stop at the technical level; it must be implemented in the improvement of international commercial dispute resolution mechanisms. First, procedural efficiency should be enhanced to prevent cross‑border commercial disputes from harming transaction value due to prolonged delays. Second, the connectivity between litigation, arbitration, mediation, and enforcement should be strengthened so that parties can obtain effective relief at lower cost. Third, attention should be paid to the communication of adjudicative reasoning and rules, so that market participants can arrange transactions, assess risks, and resume cooperation accordingly. 

The Chinese nation has a history of more than five thousand years, and traditional Chinese culture contains a wealth of principles and rules for dispute resolution. From the Book of Changes (I Ching) – "Litigation: auspicious in the beginning", with Yang Wanli's interpretation emphasizing "being upright and selfless" and "acting with principle and without excess" – to the Daoist founder Laozi's saying: "When a great enmity is reconciled, some residual enmity will remain. How can this be good? Therefore, the sage holds the left tally [the creditor's claim] but does not demand payment from others. Those who have virtue attend to their obligations; those without virtue attend to their exactions", meaning that even when one holds evidence of the other party's fault or debt (i.e., has the legal high ground), one chooses not to use it to coerce or retaliate, and further to the Confucian founder Confucius, as quoted in the Great Learning (Daxue): "In hearing litigation, I am no different from others. What I truly aim for is to have no litigation at all. Let those who lack legal merit be unable to unreasonably prolong their arguments, so that the people stand in awe of the rules. This is called knowing the root." This advocates that through moral education, the people will revere ritual and law from the bottom of their hearts, thereby resolving conflicts and eliminating lawsuits at their source. These thoughts all converge on one value, that is justice must not only be fair but also pursue harmony at its origin. This wisdom, bearing the imprint of history, is not about avoiding adjudication; rather, it reminds courts and judges never to lose sight of the ultimate purpose of justice, which is to settle disputes and maintain order, and that the guiding principle should be fairness and equity. This provides profound Chinese wisdom for transforming the challenges posed by the AI era to international commercial courts into opportunities. Understanding this in the context of the first section, its significance lies in the fact that the purpose of international commercial dispute resolution is not merely to dispose of disputes in isolation, but to clarify the rights and obligations of the parties through fair, efficient, and predictable institutional arrangements, to restore disrupted transactional relationships to an orderly track as far as possible, and to maintain the necessary stability and resilience of international supply chains and industrial chains in an uncertain environment. 

IV. Conclusion: Justice as Foundation, Harmony as Goal

The challenges and opportunities facing international commercial courts in the AI era ultimately return to the fundamental issue of enhancing the effectiveness of international commercial dispute resolution mechanisms. Technology can assist with retrieval, translation, evidence organization, and procedural management, but it cannot replace fairness and justice, nor can it substitute for a judge's careful consideration of different legal traditions, commercial practices, and social values. If international commercial courts can harness AI as a tool, take justice as their foundation, efficiency as their means, and harmony as their goal, while upholding the traditional Chinese spirit of "acting with sincerity and upholding righteousness," they will not only turn challenges into opportunities amid changes, but also play a more proactive institutional role in safeguarding the stable development of international supply chains and industrial chains. This is the proper meaning of building a foreign‑related legal system, and it is also a practical path for Chinese cultural wisdom to contribute to global governance.