This was a working draft of 2 June 2019. The final version was published in the Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Procedural Law (2019). - 1 - Self-Appointment in International Arbitration Peter Tzeng Table of Contents A. Introduction ..........................................................................1 B. Concerns ..............................................................................1 1. Conflicts of Interest..................................................1 2. Influence over Co-arbitrators ...................................2 3. Contravention of the Parties’ Intentions ..................2 C. Cases of Self-Appointment ..................................................3 D. Cases of Party Appointment ................................................4 E. Conclusion ...........................................................................5 A. Introduction 1 Disclaimer: The present entry is based on a blog post and a book chapter by the author (Tzeng, 2019; Tzeng, 2017). 2 Appointing authorities are often called upon to appoint arbitrators to arbitral tribunals ( → Appointment of arbitrators; → Appointment of adjudicators). Ordinarily, the appointing authority does not appoint him or herself to the tribunal. Nevertheless, arbitration rules generally do not prohibit self-appointment. 3 In fact, in two arbitrations brought under Annex VII United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) (‘UNCLOS’), the appointing authority appointed himself to the tribunal. First, in The “Enrica Lexie” Incident (Italy v India) (‘Enrica Lexie’), Judge Vladimir Golitsyn appointed himself as the presiding member of the tribunal. Then, in Coastal State Rights in the Black Sea, Sea of Azov, and Kerch Strait (Ukraine v Russian Federation) (‘Coastal State Rights’), Judge Boualem Bouguetaia appointed himself as a member of the tribunal. In both cases, the self-appointments were made in accordance with the applicable procedural rules set forth in Annex VII of UNCLOS (→ Annex VII arbitration: United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)). B. Concerns 4 Despite the lack of express prohibitions on self-appointment, questions may be raised concerning its propriety. In particular, there are at least three concerns that may arise. 1. Conflicts of Interest 5 The first concern is that there may be conflicts of interest (→ Conflict of interests). Many arbitration rules grant the appointing authority not only the power to appoint arbitrators, but also the power to replace arbitrators and/or the power to decide on challenges to arbitrators (→