1. Arbitration and its Brief History
Arbitration can be defined as an agreement of the disputing parties over resolving a potential or an existing dispute through arbitrators, instead of courts, within the framework of the applicable laws1.
Arbitration institution goes way back in history. Although, it was not called as arbitration, dispute resolution through arbitrators existed before the establishment of State Judiciary systems and still maintains its existence after the establishment of these systems2. The development of arbitration can be analyzed in three eras. The first era starts with the Mideval Age and continues until the late 18th century when there was no significant judicial regulations. The second era is between the early 19th century and the end of WWII which was influenced by British Arbitration Codes dated 1698 and 1889; French and German Civil Procedure Codes dated 1806 and 18793. The third and current era starts from 1950's along with the significantly increased international commerce. In this era, the parties started to prefer alternative dispute resolution methods and consequently impartial arbitration organizations emerged such as International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”), The London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”) and American Arbitration Association (“AAA”). Arbitration institution strengthened its roots international-wide with the signings of the New York Convention of 1958, the ICSID Convention of 1965, the UNCITRAL rules dated 1976 and finally the UNCITRAL Model Law dated 19854.
2. The Advantages of Arbitration
Even though the advantages of arbitration will not be explained in detail herein, we believe it would be helpful to summarize the most important advantages in order to demonstrate and establish the importance of Istanbul Arbitration Center (“IAC”). One of the key reasons which lead the parties to arbitration is that it takes less time to execute the trials and finalize the proceedings. This applies especially to the countries with developed economies where the parties prefer arbitration over state courts. Considering the existing workload of the courts in Turkey and extended duration of legal proceedings and appeal phase the importance of arbitration becomes evident once again.
In contrary to Court proceedings, particularly for international disputes or technology transfer issues, the expedited nature of arbitration as well as protection of trade secrets and stricter confidentiality makes arbitration an efficient dispute resolution method. The other factor which in addition, unlike Court decisions, it is not mandatory to publish the arbitration results which adds to the confidentiality of the process5.
Another reason for prefering arbitration over other dispute resolution methods is that the parties are allowed to freely determine the arbitrators to solve a dispute. When choosing the arbitrators, the parties can appoint specialists and expert arbitrators especially when the dispute is related to technical issues which require a certain expertise. The liberty of the parties is not limited to determining arbitrators as they are also able to choose as they are able to also choose the procedural and principal rules to be applied to the arbitral proceedings.
Due to abovementioned reasons, arbitration culture and awareness have developed worldwide in recent years and arbitration became frequently and primarily preferred dispute resolution method in developed and developing nations. As explained below, the primary duty of the IAC will be to promote the aforimentioned advantages of arbitration and and create a consistent and reliable practice.
3. Arbitration Types
Although several types of arbitration can be identified such as voluntary versus mandatory arbitration or domestic versus international arbitration, this paper analyzes ad hoc and institutional arbitration. Institutional arbitration is defined as an arbitration which solves disputes with predetermined rules and through the secretariat of permanent centers (i.e. ICC, ICSID and by IAC)6. Arbitrations other than the institutional arbitration are stated as these are out of scope of this paper as we focus on IAC.
4. Arbitration and its History in Turkey
The first regulations regarding arbitration were made in 1850s, but aside from the Civil Procedure Code numbered 1086 which regulates the domestic arbitration and drastically differs from the international arbitrations, there has been efforts to institutionalize arbitration in Turkey since 1960s. The Banking and Commercial Law Research Institute discussed proposals regarding an arbitration organization in 1965 during the 1st Arbitration Law Week, and drafted and published the preliminary draft of Arbitrators Association in 1966 in order to institutionalize arbitration.
In 1982, specific provisions regarding the execution of international arbitral awards were introduced with the Code of International Private and Procedure Law numbered 2675 which was mainly based on the New York Convention of 1958 which regulates the recognition and execution of international arbitral awards.
The ICSID Convention was approved in Turkey in 1988 and the New York Convention of 1958 was approved in 1991 making Turkey a party to these two important conventions.
In 1999, with the amendment made on article 125 of the Turkish Constitution, it was allowed to resolve the issues and disputes arising from public service related concession agreements through domestic or international arbitration. In line with the foregoing, a special law numbered 4501, regulating the principles to be applied to arbitration in cases of mentioned disputes entered into force in 2000.
In 2001, the Law of Turkish Arbitrator and Expert Association as well as the establishment of the International Arbitration Center were drafted by the Ministry of Justice8 and the Code for International Arbitration Law numbered 4686 which was drafted in accordance with UNCITRAL Model Law and Switzerland International Private Law and entered into force.
The Code of International Private Law numbered 2675 was annulled with the Code of International Private and Procedure Law numbered 5718 and the special provisions regarding the enforcement of international arbitral awards were amended as well in 2007. One of the most important steps taken to establish a strong organization for arbitrations is undoubtedly the Istanbul International Finance Center Strategy and Action Plan (“IFC - Istanbul”). The Plan was drafted by State Planning Organization and approved by the High Planning Council on 29 September 2009. The Plan stated that establishing an independent and impartial institutional arbitration center which can compete globally and using arbitration method efficiently were initial priorities in accordance with its vision to make Istanbul a regional and eventually a global finance center9.
The Civil Procedure Code numbered 6100 which entered into force in 2011 to regulate domestic arbitration in accordance with UNCITRAL Model Law and made Civil Procedure Code and International Arbitration Law compatible by resolving the differences between them.
Unfortunately, the efforts regarding arbitration legislation failed to reach its intended success. Although arbitration centers were established within The Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey (“TOBB”), Istanbul Chamber of Commerce (“ITO”) and Izmir Chamber of Commerce (“IZTO”), they failed to become effective due to many reasons. In 2012, only six (6) arbitration applications were made to ITO and none were made to IZTO. The comparison between the number of arbitration applications and the total number of disputes show and total dispute numbers that the tendency to prefer arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution methods is far from the projected figures. For instance, in the same year, 759 new applications were made to ICC, 63 of which were from Turkey; and in 2013, the number of new applications to ICC increased to 76710. The undeniable need of an impartial international arbitration center in Istanbul can be easily realized by considering the number of applications made only to ICC from Turkey.
5. International Arbitration Practice and Turkey
In countries where arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods are being used efficiently, at least one arbitration center exists. Especially, Paris, London, Geneva and Zurich can be named as prominent and frequently preferred cities which are also relatively close to Turkey. The reason why the arbitration centers in these cities are regularly chosen is that the local legislation of these countries is suitable for arbitration and local court practice of these countries is known arbitration friendly.
It is noted that even though the different arbitration centers in Switzerland, Austria or Germany are being preferred by the applicants from our county and from our neighbors, the applicants usually choose to apply the rules and procedures of ICC, LCIA or Zurich institutional arbitration due to their credibility from the past11. In the Middle East, cities of Dubai and Cairo became important arbitration venues in the recent years with their international legal experts. However, political instability, security issues and worldwide criticism on court decisions prevent Cairo from becoming an international arbitration center12, thus, making it possible for Istanbul to take its place. In other words, it is quite likely for Istanbul, to become a well-respected and preferred arbitration center at first in the region and then globally, especially with the recent improvements on commercial relations with Europe and improvements of both commercial and political relations with Arab nations. Therefore, in order to establish a well-respected and trusted arbitration center, at firs domestic arbitration should be institutionalized and promoted.
Having either insufficient knowledge or misinformation on arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods prevent the progress of the mentioned methods. In order to avoid this, parties should be encouraged to solve their disputes through arbitration or other alternative dispute resolution methods and the IAC should be actively promoted. Indeed, Turkish legislators were aware of this and “to promote and publish regarding arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution methods, to encourage and support scientific research on arbitration, to cooperate with domestic and foreign organizations and persons” and “Promoting and publishing regarding arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution methods encourage and support scientific researches regarding the same and cooperate with domestic and foreign organizations and persons” were stated Indeeed, Turkish legislators were aware of this and “to promote and publish regarding arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution methods, to encourage and support scientific research on arbitration, to cooperate with domestic and foreign organizations and persons” duties of IAC13.
6. Istanbul Arbitration Center Law (“IACL”) and Istanbul Arbitration Center
In this section the legislation process is explained at first, general information on the IACL is provided and then the structure, organs and operation of the IAC is examined along with recent suggestions and complaints.
6.1. Legislation Process and General Information on the IACL
The Istanbul Arbitration Center Draft law (“Draft Law”) was drafted by the Ministry of Justice and submitted to the national parliament on 25 March 2013 as a result of the studies on the establishment of an arbitration center in Turkey which can compete with similar organizations globally.
The Working Group which was formed within the Ministry of Justice has examined the structures of many arbitration centers and decided to take German Arbitration Center and Czech Republic Chamber of Commerce and Agriculture Arbitration Center as models for the Draft Law. Although the German Arbitration Center was formed as an association, Czech Republic Chamber of Commerce and Agriculture Arbitration Center was established by law. However, being the country's driving force for arbitration as an independent and impartial structure is the common point of the two institutions.
The Draft Law was submitted to the Turkish Parliament on 25 March 2013. The legislation drew the attention of international arbitration community and the Draft Law was ratified in Turkish Parliament on 20 November 2014. The IACL numbered 6570 entered into force on 1 January 2015.
The IACL regulates the structure of Istanbul Arbitration Center which is to be founded in Istanbul and to operate in global scale. IAC is subject to private law, has its own legal entity and is designed to disseminate information and encourage arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods by adressing the whole society and all relevant business organizations. It is also planned that the IAC coordinates arbitration and especially plays an active role in establishing relationships with foreign arbitration centers.
The IACL regulates only the structural organization of the IAC, it does not determine the arbitration rules. Determination of IAC's arbitration rules is given as a task to the IAC pursuant to the article 4 of the IACL. As explained in detail below, pursuant to the temporary article 1/III, the rules and regulations including the procedural and principal provisions, will be drafted and promulgated by the IAC within six (6) months after the election of Board of Directors. Although, it is possible to use the experience of successful arbitration centers as a base, it is essential to act with patience and rigor as rules and provisions will be critical in achieving targeted goals. Thus, if the six-month period will not enough to determine all rules and provisions, the IAC should take extra time instead of rushing to meet the deadline.
According to the article 1 of the IACL, the purpose of the Code is stated as; “...to ensure the resolution of disputes including the ones with foreign elements through arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods...”
According to the reasoning of the IACL, the disputes within the IAC’s jurisdiction are stated as disputes related to private law and concession agreements related to public service. That means the IAC's jurisdiction is not limited to contractual disputes as all disputes subject to arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods such as those related to tortious acts can be taken to IAC.
The tasks of the IAC are stated briefly as; (i) to determine the IAC rules of arbitration and make sure to render the services and (ii) to promote arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods, to encourage, support and conduct scientific research on arbitration and to cooperate with domestic and foreign organizations and individuals. As stated above, in addition to regulate the IAC rules of arbitration, the task of promotion stated as a primary duty in accordance with the goal to increase the tendency to apply to arbitration or alternative dispute resolution methods. Inevitably, this task should be executed with maximum effort as it would not be possible to establish a well-respected and trusted international arbitration center without maximizing the tendency to choose domestic arbitration. Although it would satisfy the public if the article which regulates the tasks and duties of the IAC would have been determined more thoroughly and detailed, unfortunately the current article 4 seem to be an open target to the possible criticism due to its content.
The other articles of the IACL (Articles 5 -13) regulate the structure of the IAC and article 14 and 15 respectively regulate “Disqualification and Confidentiality” and “Incomes and Expenses”.
Article 16, which regulates the “Applicable Provisions”, states that the relevant provisions of Civil Code and Law of Associations will be applied in case the IACL remains silent regarding any matter.
The only provisional article of the IACL also regulates the structure of IAC and more importantly states that the rules to be applied will be drafted and entered into force by the IAC within six (6) months after the election of Board of Directors and the budget of the IAC will be financed by the Prime Ministry in the first two years.
There has been criticisms stating that the IACL does not regulate the concept as detailed as it should and does not involve provisions regarding many important issues16. Of course, it is possible to draft a law which regulates the subject thoroughly so that it could respond to questions raised in arbitration community. In order to do so, the legislator should start working on amending the IACL and take into consideration all the constructive criticism and proposals which would show that opinions of a very few arbitration experts in Turkey are well appreciated by doing so it would be possible to reach the common goal to establish and function the IAC in the best possible fashion and to create an arbitration spirit and culture.
6.2. The Structure of Istanbul Arbitration Center
The IAC Organization which has a legal entity consists of; (a) General Assembly, (b) Board of Directors, (c) Auditor, (d) Advisory Board, (e) National and International Arbitration Courts (f) Secretary General.
6.2.1. General Assembly
As stated in the preamble of the IACL, the success of the IAC is closely attached to the persons who will be employed in the IAC, being informed, experienced and interested in the matter of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution methods. In accordance with that, the General Assembly of the IAC is planned to consist of the elected people from different organizations.
Accordingly, the General Assembly will consist of twenty five (25) members in total with ten years or more experience in their fields, selected from The Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey, Union of Turkish Bar Association (to be elected by the Presidents of Bar Associations), Board of Higher Education, Turkish Exporters Assembly, Ministry of Justice, Turkish Participation Banks Association, Capital Markets Board of Turkey, Borsa Istanbul Joint Stock Company (formerly known as Istanbul Stock Exchange), Turkish Tradesman and Artisan Confederation, Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency, Turkish Capital Markets Association, and Labor Union and Employer’s Union with the most members.
It is aimed to constitute an independent, impartial, functional and credible General Assembly by establishing a broader participation. In the reasoning, it was stated that Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey and the Union of Turkish Bar Association have right to choose the highest number of the members taking into account that most of the disputes may occur between traders and that the attorneys are the parties who would set forth the arbitration clause in the contracts and to ensure the settlement through arbitration in cases where the dispute arose.
The members of the General Assembly shall be selected for four years with an option to be selected again. If the membership ends for any reason, another member will be selected to complete the previous member’s remaining time.
According to the article 7 of the IACL, the tasks and duties of the General Assembly are; (i) to select the Board of Directors members, members of Advisory Board and auditors, (ii) to examine the activity report and balance sheet of the Board of Directors and to decide whether to absolve the Board of Directors, (iii) to examine and approve the IAC rules of arbitration and regulations to be applied to arbitration and alternative dispute resolution options which is to be drafted by the Board of Directors, the budget and the procedural rules regarding the operation of IAC (iv) to determine the attendance fee, salary and expenses of the General Assembly, Board of Directors and Advisory Board members.
The General Assembly meeting shall convene once a year in October. If required, Board of Directors or Auditor can call for a General Assembly meeting. General Assembly is entitled to convene by simple majority and decide by simple majority of the attendees.
In order to analyze the structure of the IAC which is also the main reason of the criticism towards the IACL, is that the majority of the General Assembly consists of banking and finance sector. Criticisms surrounding this issue are based on the fact most disputes arise from energy, construction and infrastructural issues and thus members from Chamber of Architects etc. should have also been included to the General Assembly.
Another criticism towards the structure of General Assembly is that the Assembly includes many members from government organizations including the Ministry of Justice would arguably affect the impartiality and autonomy of the IAC. Even though the General Assembly is not going to resolve disputes directly, as it will be involved in the approval of the IAC rules of arbitration and the operation of IAC, it would be helpful to constitute a structure with more participation from relevant Chambers and Associations to minimize criticisms.
It is also criticized that Assembly that will approve IAC rules of arbitration is not fully equipped with sufficient knowledge to perform such operation and not in close relationship with international arbitration community. In this respect, it is rightly proposed that the IAC rules of arbitration to be drafted by professional directors and more important than that by arbitration experts17.
6.2.2. Board of Directors
Board of Directors shall be elected for four years and consists of five principal and four reserve members to be selected from the General Assembly and at least three of principal members and two of reserve members shall have a law degree. The President will be elected from members having a law degree and represent and manage the IAC. The Board of Directors can also convene online and decide by simple majority of its members.
Since the IAC rules of arbitration are not determined yet, the Board of Directors is going to determine and submit the IAC rules of arbitration to the approval of the General Assembly. Pursuant to the article 9 of the IACL, the tasks and duties of the Board of Directors are stated as; (i) to determine and prepare the drafts of IAC rules of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution options and to submit the same to the General Assembly for its approval after the opinions of Advisory Board, (ii) to prepare and submit the balance sheets and activity report to General Assembly for its decision on discharge the same, (iii) prepare the budget for the coming year and submit the same to the approval of General Assembly (iv) to determine and prepare the arbitrator’s fees and arbitration costs and to submit them to General Assembly for its approval.
6.2.3. Auditor
One or more auditors will be selected for four (4) years by the General Assembly from its members or outside the General Assembly limited to three persons. In case membership ends for any reason, another member will be selected to complete the previous member’s remaining term of duty. The auditor is also entitled to audit annual activities of the Board of Directors and report them to the General Assembly.
6.2.4. Advisory Board
The Advisory Board is constituted in order to make IAC more efficient and to help it to achieve its goals. The Advisory Board will consist of fifteen (15) members with at least five years of experience in arbitration or alternative dispute resolution methods. The members of the Advisory Board will be selected for a term of four (4) years by the General Assembly from the list which will be prepared by the Board of Directors. There is no limitation related to the nationality of the Advisory Board members.
Due to the importance of the tasks and duties of the Advisory Board, it is helpful to elect reputable members with vast international arbitration experience. In order to confirm the international identity and standing of IAC and to establish a reliable image worldwide, it would be helpful to elect foreign nationals with experience in other international arbitration centers18.
6.2.5. National and International Arbitration Courts
Undoubtedly, the most important duty is given to national and international arbitration courts in terms of dispute resolution. Both courts shall consist of five (5) members; the President of the Board of Directors, Secretary General and three other members with at least ten years of experience in the field of law. Besides, since the President of the Board of Directors and Secretary General has to be law graduates, all members of the courts will be law graduates.
The term of office for the elected selected members by the Board of Directors is stated as five (5) years. If the membership ends for any reason, another member will be selected to complete the previous member’s term of duty.
The Chairmen of Arbitration Courts will be selected by simple majority of the court members. Each court will gather by the attendance of at least three members and decide by simple majority of votes; in case of an equality of votes the Chairman’s vote will be taken into consideration. The meetings can be held online and the decisions can be rendered online. The parties can also object to the arbitration court decisions before the same arbitration court in seven (7) days after the decision is served. However the decisions rendered upon the objections will be final. The arbitration courts will also execute other duties which are going to be determined in the IAC rules of arbitration.
As stated in the reasoning of the article, the tasks and duties of the arbitration courts were not regulated in a limited nature so that it would be possible to determine the tasks and duties of the arbitration courts within the framework of the IAC rules of arbitration which are going to be determined by the IAC. This surely provides an autonomous and flexible structure to the IAC.
6.2.6. Secretary General
Secretary General is responsible for the operation of administrative affairs and consists of Secretary General, Deputy Secretary General and required number of personnel. Secretary General and Deputy Secretary General will be selected by the Board of Directors from legal experts with ten (10) years of experience in dispute resolution.
As is known, the secretariat no doubt carries an important role in international arbitration. Even if the other wheels of the system run perfectly, the lack of secretary serviced would make it impossible for IAC to compete with the current international arbitration institutions. This is why it is crucial to establish a reliable and expert secretariat. In this context, it would require to get support from the institutions with years of international arbitration experience especially regarding the training of secretariat personnel.
6.3. Confidentiality and Disqualification
Confidentiality is one of the most important factors along with the speed and reasonable fees when it comes to choosing the arbitration venue. The members and personnel of the organs of the IAC are mandated to keep the secrets along with the information related to the parties or to third parties confidential whom they learned due their positions even after they leave their jobs. They are also prohibited to the mentioned information with other parties. The members and personnel of the organs of the IAC cannot take advantage of the abovementioned information and also cannot make any statements regarding the same without a written consent of the parties. By taking this fact into consideration, aside from the Advisory Board, the members and personnel of the IAC organs are prohibited from being an arbitrator during their time of duty unless determined otherwise by the parties with the article 14.
This provision raised some eyebrows as the sanction of violation of this article has not been regulated. It would be helpful to regulate these issues reassuringly transparent and disincentive so that it would help to establish a reliable and transparent structure.
6.4. IAC Incomes and Expenses
It is obvious that the IAC must have a solid financial structure in order to achieve the intended goals and to provide an efficient secretariat service by promoting in the best way. Pursuant to the article 15 of the IACL, the incomes of the IAC are stated as the income corresponding to the provided services, donations and allocations granted by the organization which select the members. The allocation amount will be determined by the ratio based on the number of selected members by each organization. The mentioned allocation will cover the missing part of the approved budget by the General Assembly. Ministry of Justice and Board of Higher Education are not mandated to grant funds.
In terms of the expenses, the IAC is entitled to spend the required amount in order to perform its services. On the other hand, the arbitration fees should be able to compete with other international arbitration seats’ as it is one of the most important elements regarding the selection of international arbitration seats. Although it has many advantages on dispute resolution, in recent years, studies have been made to reduce arbitration costs as this issue has been on the agenda of the practitioners.
In order to help the IAC to perform its duties, it has been also determined that the budget of the IAC will be supported from the budget of the Prime Ministry for the first two years pursuant to the provisional article of IACL. Although it has been subject to criticism all along due to state support, it is crucial for the IAC to have a solid financial structure in order to achieve its goals. The criticism which suggests that getting financial support from government would affect the impartiality of the IAC is rather qualified as theoretical. In practice, a proper example is the Hong Kong Arbitration Court which is also one of the important venues for arbitration nowadays. Hong Kong also received government financial support and at that time criticized similarly to IAC20. It is obvious that IAC will not be the only and last example of an arbitration center which is supported by the state temporarily.
Moreover; getting financial support from the State for a temporary period of two years shall not affect the credibility and impartiality of the IAC in terms of international arbitration since the disputes eventually will be resolved by the arbitrators who will be selected by the parties21.
7. CONCLUSION
The legal infrastructure of our country which also has a great advantage to become a finance center in international trade and eventually an arbitration center due to its geographical position is suitable to development and promotion of arbitration. Having a reputable arbitration center in our country would no doubt greatly contribute to Turkish legal system and enhance the reliability in international platform.
Turkey will emerge as a preferable arbitration and alternative dispute resolution venue after making the required promotion, increasing the society’s awareness and encouraging the same to prefer arbitration or alternative dispute resolution methods. It is also required to make sure that the IAC will remain independent and impartial in every single case.
Certainly, the national legal system shall be arranged accordingly and become friendlier to arbitration. In order to do that the courts must be arbitration-friendly. In addition to that, some opinions of the Chambers of the Court of Appeal on the same arbitration related matters do not match up with the international arbitration practice. For this reason Turkey’s arbitration non friendly image must be erased as soon as possible. Dismissing enforcement applications of foreign judgments due to the violation of public order is unfortunately creating serious problems in practice. In order to prevent this happening, it would be helpful to establish a new and separate Chamber in the Court of Appeals consisting of members who are experts in arbitration.
We are of the opinion that the IAC would become primarily a regional and then an international arbitration venue considering that it will be structured as independent, autonomous and transparent arbitration center. The purpose is to make the IAC a consistent and stable arbitration venue and the ultimate aim the aim is to establish a solid financial structure in İstanbul.
8. FOOTNOTE
1 Akıncı, Ziya, Milletlerarası Tahkim, Vedat Kitapçılık, İstanbul, 2013, sf. 3.
2 Yılmaz, Halil, Uluslararası Tahkim Örgütlenmeleri, Ankara Barosu Dergisi, 2004-2.
3 Yeşilova, Bilgehan, Milletlerarası Tahkimin Hukuki Niteliği Üzerine Düşünceler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, TBB Dergisi, Sayı 76, 2008, sf. 87-90.
4 Yeşilova, Bilgehan, Milletlerarası Tahkimin Hukuki Niteliği Üzerine Düşünceler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, TBB Dergisi, Sayı 76, 2008, sf. 90.
5 Yıldırım, Nevhis Deren, Tahkimin Olumlu ve Olumsuz Yönleri, Ankara Barosu Dergisi, 2002-4.
6 Akıncı, Ziya, Milletlerarası Tahkim, Vedat Kitapçılık, İstanbul, 2013, sf. 5.
7 Şanlı, Cemal, Uluslararası Ticari Akitlerin Hazırlanması ve Uyuşmazlıkların Çözümü, Beta, İstanbul, 2013, sf. 286-287.
8 İstanbul Tahkim Merkezi Kanunu Tasarısı Genel Gerekçesi.
9 İstanbul Uluslararası Finans Merkezi Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı, Ekim 2009, sf. 6.
10 http://hsfnotes.com/arbitration/ 2014/09/09/theicc-2013-statisticsanother-busy-yearfor-internationalarbitration/.
11 The promotions and awareness raising being performed by the institutions especially by the ICC have the main role in that. Nowadays many conferences and workshops are being regularly held in Istanbul and most of them are organized by the mentioned institution.
12 Akıncı, Ziya, Neden İstanbul Tahkim Merkezi sf. 1-4.
13 6570 sayılı İstanbul Tahkim Merkezi Kanunu, madde 4/I-b.
14 Promulgated in Official Gazette on 29 November 2014.
15 Arbitrability is governed under article 408 of Civil Procedure Code and 1/IV of Turkish International Arbitration Law but it is out of the scope of this article. 16 For the criticized matters for not being regulated in the IACL, please see: Orak, Cem Çağatay ve Erbilen, Murat, Istanbul: A New International Arbitration Center?, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Summer 2014, sf. 145.
17 Akıncı, Ziya, Neden İstanbul Tahkim Merkezi sf. 8.
18 For further criticism and suggestions towards establishing the best image for the IAC and even naming the center as Istanbul International Arbitration Center, please see: Orak, Cem Çağatay ve Erbilen, Murat, Istanbul: A New International Arbitration Center?, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Summer 2014, sf. 144.
19 For detail regarding the importance of secretariat in international arbitration, please see, Akıncı, Ziya, Neden İstanbul Tahkim Merkezi sf. 13.
20 07.11.2013 tarihli Sanayi, Ticaret Enerji, Tabii Kaynaklar, Bilgi ve Teknoloji Komisyonu Raporu, s. 7.
21 Akıncı, Ziya, Neden İstanbul Tahkim Merkezi sf. 7-8.
