Supreme Court Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo made this clear, saying innovation should remain anchored in the values that give adjudication its legitimacy.

Gesmundo said this in his keynote address at the Inter-Pacific Bar Association (IPBA) Arbitration Day 2026 at the University of the Philippines - Bonifacio Global City Campus (UP BGC), Taguig City, on 18 September 2026.

The event, themed “Rethinking International Arbitration in an Evolving Global Landscape,” gathered IPBA officers, members, and arbitration practitioners from across the Asia-Pacific region.

The conference featured panel discussions on artificial intelligence (AI) in international arbitration, global enforcement and asset recovery, expert testimony in arbitration, and careers in arbitration-adjacent practice.

The chief justice noted the timeliness of the conference: “International arbitration is evolving because the world in which it operates is changing. Commerce increasingly crosses jurisdictions. Capital and information move with extraordinary speed. Transactions and disputes have become more complex. Evidence is increasingly digital and technologically generated. Assets may be distributed across jurisdictions. And artificial intelligence or AI is beginning to transform the way lawyers research, analyze, and present disputes.”

He added how international arbitration has become in demand: “[It] has earned an important place in the legal framework of global commerce because it allows parties to choose a neutral forum, to select decision-

makers with appropriate expertise, and to adopt procedures suited to the nature of their dispute.”

Gesmundo noted on the growing use of AI in arbitration, how it can already assist lawyers with legal research, document review, information management, translation, and data analysis, offering significant gains in efficiency, especially in complex arbitration cases involving large volumes of documents and highly technical material.

But the real challenge lies not in what AI can do, but in ensuring it is used responsibly — a principle reflected in the SC's own Governance Framework on the Use of Human-Centered Augmented Intelligence in the Judiciary, which provides that technology may support the exercise of professional judgment, but cannot take responsibility for it, Gesmundo said.

“Technology may assist the process, but the responsibility for the process remains human…Technology is a means; justice

remains the end,” he said.

The SC’s efforts to respond to the changing needs of society are reflected in its comprehensive reform program, the Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations 2022-2027 (SPJI).

He reiterated arbitration’s legitimacy depends on a sound relationship with domestic law and the courts that give legal effect to the arbitral process, particularly in enforcing awards and helping parties recover assets that may be spread across jurisdictions.

“The effectiveness of arbitration depends not only on the strength of the arbitral process itself, but also on the capacity of the institutions that support it,” he said.

The IPBA was commended by Gesmundo for investing in the next generation of arbitration practitioners, noting that while today’s lawyers have access to an extraordinary amount of information, sound professional judgment cannot simply be acquired through technology – it must be developed through experience, mentorship, reflection, and responsibility.

“We cannot predict precisely what the next decade of international arbitration will bring. But we can determine the principles by which we respond to them, and we can prepare the next generation not simply to inherit the institutions we have built, but to improve them responsibly.”