Abstract

This paper critically analyses two pivotal multilateral conventions shaping the landscape of international dispute resolution, i.e., the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the 2019 Singapore Convention on Mediation. The New York Convention, ratified by over 170 countries, has been instrumental in standardizing the enforcement of arbitral awards across borders, promoting arbitration as the preferred method for resolving international commercial disputes. The Singapore Convention, although newer, introduces a framework for the recognition and enforcement of mediated settlement agreements, highlighting mediation as a viable, amicable alternative to arbitration. By comparing their scope, enforcement mechanisms, and defenses against enforcement, this paper evaluates the impact of both conventions on global commerce and legal systems. The analysis explores their respective contributions to predictability, efficiency, and fairness in cross-border dispute resolution while also addressing criticisms, such as the inconsistent application of public policy exceptions and challenges in implementation. The paper concludes by discussing potential reforms and the future interplay between arbitration and mediation, considering emerging trends and the evolving role of these conventions in promoting effective and accessible international dispute resolution mechanisms.

Keywords