Although fair trial guarantees have always been recognised as constituting an integral aspect of international arbitral proceedings, this has largely been viewed through the lens of civil procedure rather than as a matter of public law and human rights. This state of affairs has further been compounded by the confidential nature of arbitration and the relative scarcity of set aside (annulment) proceedings before the courts of the seat of arbitration on the grounds of unequal treatment, and before human rights bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights. Moreover, it has always been difficult to reconcile contractual freedom and the advantages offered by arbitration with equal treatment and fair trial claims. This article demonstrates the existence of a set of general principles concerning the meaning and content of equal treatment, which are consistent with its commercial (and civil procedure) and human rights dimensions. The basis of this conclusion is Article 18 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, as consistently interpreted and adapted by local laws and judgments, arbitral statutes and determinations by the European Court of Human Rights.

中文翻译：

---

国际商事仲裁中当事人的平等待遇

尽管公平审判保障一直被认为是国际仲裁程序的一个组成部分，但这在很大程度上是从民事程序的角度来看待的，而不是公法和人权问题。仲裁的保密性以及在仲裁地法院以不平等待遇为由以及在欧洲法院等人权机构提起的搁置（废止）程序的相对稀缺，进一步加剧了这种情况人权。此外，始终难以将合同自由和仲裁所提供的优势与平等待遇和公平审判要求调和起来。本文论证了关于平等待遇的意义和内容的一套一般原则的存在，符合其商业（和民事程序）和人权方面的要求。这一结论的基础是《贸易法委员会国际商业仲裁示范法》第 18 条，该条由当地法律和判决、仲裁法规和欧洲人权法院的裁决一致解释和调整。