JL: I think being Hong Kong-born and having practiced in Hong Kong and international arbitration for a long time, I can say without a doubt it operates as a very independent neutral jurisdiction for arbitration. The concept of “one country, two systems” is second nature to those of us familiar with Hong Kong and mainland China, but it may not be as well understood elsewhere. So there’s more HKIAC can do to explain that.
Hong Kong is a sophisticated common law jurisdiction with its own arbitration regime and a genuinely pro-arbitration, independent judiciary. That’s core to why it remains a leading arbitration hub.
It helps to unpack what “neutrality and independence” actually means to commercial parties.
First, parties want decision-makers who are fair and unbiased and in HKIAC cases, parties choose their own arbitrators, so there’s no loss of control there. Second, courts: parties don’t want the seat’s courts interfering with how arbitration is run and Hong Kong court decisions are consistently pro-arbitration, with minimal judicial interference. Third, enforcement – parties don’t want their Hong Kong awards set aside for no good reason and HKIAC arbitrations have concrete enforcement and interim measure advantages because of the specific arrangements between Hong Kong and mainland China.
Once you unpack it that way, Hong Kong and HKIAC arbitration offer real assurance of a neutral, professional, efficient process, particularly for disputes with a mainland Chinese nexus.