I am pleased to join Mr Plantey and Mr Slate in welcoming you to this Colloquium on International Arbitration, organized by the AAA, ICC International Court of Arbitration and ICSID. The collaboration of these three institutions in organizing such colloquia every year has indeed been helpful in enhancing awareness of the value of arbitration and hopefully in increasing its effectiveness.

I congratulate Mr Plantey, Mr Schwartz, and their colleagues for their organization of this year's colloquium on the important topic of "The Status of the Arbitrator". The large audience of actual arbitrators, potential arbitrators, and persons who deal with arbitrators as counsel, is evidence of the importance of this topic.

As you all know, the success of arbitration depends on many factors. The drafting of the arbitration clause, the choice of arbitrators and counsel, the choice of the location of the proceeding, the rules governing it and the applicable substantive law are all relevant factors. As in any human endeavor, however, success ultimately depends on the individuals involved.

In the case of arbitration, the arbitrators have the leading role. The success of arbitration depends on their expertise, impartiality and efficiency.

In the international arena, developing and small states traditionally feared arbitration on the assumption that it would be dominated by arbitrators who are alien to their cultures and legal systems. In his introductory remarks this morning, Mr Plantey spoke of the obligation of the arbitrator as "une obligation de résultat". The choice of arbitrators has a great deal to do with that result, although it is often not the nationality of the arbitrator that counts, but his or her background, sense of justice and familiarity with the arbitration rules and the applicable law, and realization of the proper limits of his or her role.

However, the success of arbitration does not depend only on the good personal qualities of arbitrators. It is also important that all concerned - the parties and arbitration institutions, as well as the arbitrators themselves - have a clear understanding of the elements that together define the status of the arbitrator. As listed in the program of today's colloquium, these elements include the rights and duties of the arbitrator, the fiscal status of the arbitrator and the means of recourse against the arbitrator. A clear understanding of those elements should inform the selection of an individual to serve as arbitrator, the decision of that individual whether or not to accept such service and the performance of the service itself.

The purpose of our discussions today, as I understand it, is to help us to acquire such understanding and perhaps to identify areas affecting the status of the arbitrator that may be in need of improvement, for the benefit of arbitrators, parties and arbitration institutions. Last night, Mr Plantey admonished today's speakers to address these issues with a touch of philosophy, and humour if possible. I am looking forward, as I am sure you all are, to benefit from these discussions.