Reviewing International Commercial Arbitration in China 2026: What the Supreme People’s Court Expert Committee Signals
- China’s 15th Five-Year Plan outline calls for accelerating the building of the foreign-related rule-of-law system and its capacity, and for improving the mechanisms for international commercial mediation, arbitration and litigation.
“十五五”规划纲要提出”加快涉外法治体系和能力建设，健全国际商事调解、仲裁、诉讼等机制”的要求。
- The Supreme People’s Court has established the International Commercial Court and built a “one-stop” platform linking litigation, arbitration and mediation for international commercial disputes; Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen are advancing the building of international commercial arbitration centres.
最高人民法院设立国际商事法庭，构建了诉讼、仲裁、调解有机衔接的”一站式”国际商事纠纷解决平台；北京、上海、广州、深圳等地正积极推进国际商事仲裁中心建设。
- The International Commercial Expert Committee is not an arbitration institution and does not accept cases directly. Its members, on a voluntary basis and at the request of the International Commercial Court, mediate disputes, give advisory opinions on specialised legal questions, and advise on rules and judicial policy.
国际商事专家委员会不是仲裁机构，也不直接受理案件。专家委员在当事人自愿基础上受国际商事法庭委托调解纠纷，就专门性法律问题提供咨询意见，并就规则与司法政策提供意见建议。
- On 9 September 2026 the Supreme People’s Court held the fifth symposium of the International Commercial Expert Committee in Shanghai, its largest to date, with more than 200 participants; it renewed the appointment of 37 experts whose terms had expired, bringing the committee to 62 experts from 25 countries and regions.
2026 年 9 月 9 日，最高人民法院在上海举行国际商事专家委员会第五届研讨会，为成立以来规模最大的一次，200 余人参会；最高法继续聘任已到期的 37 位中外专家，专家委员来自 25 个国家和地区、共 62 位。
- From 2021 to 2025 Chinese courts concluded 128,000 first-instance foreign-related commercial cases involving more than 100 countries and regions.
2021 年至 2025 年，中国法院共审结一审涉外商事案件 12.8 万件，涉及 100 多个国家和地区。
- Chinese courts have for nearly 40 years applied the principle that treaties must be observed, performed their obligations under the New York Convention strictly, and taken a judicial stance favourable to the enforcement of awards.
近 40 年来，中国法院始终坚持”条约必须信守”原则，严格履行《纽约公约》义务，秉持”有利于裁决执行”的司法立场。
- Expert members have produced multiple foreign-law ascertainment reports and co-authored the case compilations of Chinese courts’ international commercial adjudication, so a party facing a question of applicable foreign law can seek support through this mechanism.
专家委员已受托出具多份域外法查明报告，并共同编写中国法院国际商事审判案例精要系列丛书，因此面对适用外国法问题的当事人可通过该机制获得支持。
Reviewing International Commercial Arbitration in China 2026: What the Supreme People’s Court Expert Committee Signals | 2026 年中国国际商事仲裁体系回顾：最高人民法院国际商事专家委员会释放的信号
Overview
Two developments in the autumn of 2026 describe where China’s international commercial dispute-resolution system stands. The first is a theoretical article, “Building an Internationally Competitive Commercial Arbitration System”, published in Guangming Daily and on Qiushi on 2 October 2026, which sets the policy frame: the 15th Five-Year Plan outline requires faster building of the foreign-related rule-of-law system and its capacity, and better mechanisms for international commercial mediation, arbitration and litigation. The second is the fifth symposium of the Supreme People’s Court International Commercial Expert Committee, held in Shanghai on 9 September 2026. This article sets out the policy frame, the “one-stop” platform, the expert committee mechanism and the judicial stance on enforcing awards — and states what the expert committee is not: it is not an arbitration institution.
Key developments in 2026
The policy frame. The article records that the 15th Five-Year Plan outline requires China to accelerate the building of the foreign-related rule-of-law system and its capacity and to improve the mechanisms for international commercial mediation, arbitration and litigation. Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen are advancing the building of international commercial arbitration centres, and the Supreme People’s Court has established the International Commercial Court; together they form a “one-stop” platform linking litigation, arbitration and mediation. China also participates in the rule-making of organisations such as UNCITRAL and has promoted the integration into international rules of dispute-resolution ideas with Chinese characteristics, including “mediation first” and the combination of mediation and arbitration.
Competitiveness and arbitration highlands. On competitiveness the article sets three requirements: optimising the supporting environment, since judicial support for and supervision of arbitration is an important guarantee of its healthy development, and courts performing judicial-review duties, unifying adjudication standards and improving efficiency are conditions for an arbitration-friendly judicial environment; training foreign-related legal talent; and advancing the digital and intelligent transformation of arbitration. It sketches three arbitration highlands: Beijing as a comprehensive international arbitration service highland; Shanghai as a financial arbitration brand; and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, with its “one country, two systems, three legal regions” arrangement, as a preferred place for cross-border dispute resolution.
The symposium. The fifth symposium of the Supreme People’s Court International Commercial Expert Committee, and the renewal of its expert members, took place in Shanghai on 9 September 2026 under the theme “Integration of the Rule of Law, Collaborative Innovation, and Intelligently Linking the World”. Zhang Jun, Chief Justice and President of the Supreme People’s Court, attended and spoke. It was the largest gathering since the committee was established, with more than 200 expert members and heads of international organisations, arbitration institutions and mediation institutions taking part.
What the expert committee does. The mechanism traces back to January 2018, when the Central Leading Group for Comprehensively Deepening Reform approved the Opinions on Establishing the Belt and Road International Commercial Dispute Resolution Mechanism and Institutions, providing for the Court to establish the International Commercial Court and lead the formation of an International Commercial Expert Committee. Expert members, on a voluntary basis and at the request of the Court, mediate international commercial disputes; provide advisory opinions on specialised legal questions; and advise on the revision and development planning of the Court’s rules and on judicial interpretations and judicial policy. Members have produced multiple foreign-law ascertainment reports and jointly compiled the series “Essentials of Chinese Courts’ International Commercial Adjudication Cases”.
Renewal and scale. The Court decided to continue to appoint the 37 Chinese and foreign experts whose terms had expired. To date it has appointed 62 expert members from 25 countries and regions — a route to opinions drawn from many legal systems for a party whose contract is governed by foreign law or whose dispute touches several jurisdictions.
The courts’ record and stance. Wang Shumei, a Grand Justice of the Second Rank and full-time member of the Supreme People’s Court Judicial Committee at vice-ministerial level, stated that from 2021 to 2025 Chinese courts concluded 128,000 first-instance foreign-related commercial cases involving more than 100 countries and regions, and that the courts apply the principle of equal protection and work to build a fair, stable, transparent and predictable international trade legal environment. Shen Hongyu, Chief Judge of the No. 4 Civil Division and head of the Second International Commercial Court, stated that for nearly 40 years Chinese courts have applied the principle that treaties must be observed, performed their New York Convention obligations strictly, and maintained a judicial stance favourable to the enforcement of awards.
Topics and views. The symposium covered four themes: the modernisation of international commercial arbitration and issues in applying the New York Convention; the further innovative development of international commercial mediation; the application and future of artificial intelligence in international commercial dispute resolution; and safeguarding the stable development of international industrial and supply chains. Yang Liangyi, honorary chairman of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, said the parties should strengthen cooperation to ensure the effective enforcement of arbitral awards.
Practical implications for foreign businesses
Choice of forum. The policy frame identifies three profiles — a comprehensive arbitration service highland in Beijing, a financial arbitration brand in Shanghai, and the Greater Bay Area as a preferred place for cross-border dispute resolution. A party can match the profile to the transaction, while remembering that these are policy orientations rather than mandatory venues.
The one-stop platform. Linking litigation, arbitration and mediation in a single platform means the three routes are designed to connect rather than stand apart. For a party that wants to preserve a commercial relationship, mediation alongside arbitration and litigation is a practical option.
Foreign-law ascertainment. Where a contract is governed by foreign law, the expert committee mechanism offers support through the foreign-law ascertainment reports members have produced. This can reduce the risk attached to the applicable law, and should be considered at the dispute-planning stage.
Enforcement. The judicial stance of Chinese courts under the New York Convention — the principle that treaties must be observed and a stance favourable to the enforcement of awards — is directly relevant to a party that selects a Chinese seat of arbitration or needs an award enforced in China.
What the expert committee is not. The committee is not an arbitration institution and does not accept cases directly. Its members mediate only where the parties agree and the Court entrusts them, give advisory opinions on specialised legal questions, and advise on rules and judicial policy. A party cannot apply to the committee for arbitration, and the committee does not issue arbitral awards.
Related reading
- International commercial arbitration in China: the one-stop platform linking litigation, arbitration and mediation.
- Judicial review of arbitration and enforcement of awards under the New York Convention.
Sources
- 求是网·《构建具有国际竞争力的商事仲裁体系》（2026-10-02）：https://www.qstheory.cn/20261002/337d65e1bc89413085b0d17f714d3d96/c.html
- 光明网转《光明日报》2026-10-02 第 07 版同文：https://news.gmw.cn/2026-10/02/content_39030858.htm
- 《中国审判》·最高人民法院国际商事专家委员会第五届研讨会暨专家委员续聘活动：https://new.qq.com/rain/a/20261012A02ZC800
- 最高人民法院官网：https://www.court.gov.cn/
- 最高人民法院国际商事法庭官网：https://cicc.court.gov.cn/
2026 年中国国际商事仲裁体系回顾：最高人民法院国际商事专家委员会释放的信号
概述
2026 年秋季的两项进展，共同勾勒出中国国际商事争议解决体系当前所处的位置。第一项是 2026 年 10 月 2 日发表于《光明日报》及求是网的理论文章《构建具有国际竞争力的商事仲裁体系》，它给出了政策框架：”十五五”规划纲要要求加快涉外法治体系和能力建设，健全国际商事调解、仲裁、诉讼等机制。第二项是最高人民法院国际商事专家委员会第五届研讨会，2026 年 9 月 9 日在上海举行。前者说明制度的方向，后者说明其中一项具体机制如何运转。本文梳理政策框架、”一站式”平台、专家委员会机制以及关于仲裁裁决执行的司法立场，并把专家委员会”不是什么”讲清楚：它不是仲裁机构，当事人不能向它申请仲裁。
2026 年的关键进展
政策框架。 2026 年 10 月 2 日的文章记载，”十五五”规划纲要要求中国加快涉外法治体系和能力建设，健全国际商事调解、仲裁、诉讼等机制。北京、上海、广州、深圳等地正积极推进国际商事仲裁中心建设，最高人民法院设立了国际商事法庭，共同构建了诉讼、仲裁、调解有机衔接的”一站式”国际商事纠纷解决平台。中国积极参与联合国国际贸易法委员会等国际组织的规则制定，推动”调解优先、调仲结合”等具有中国特色的纠纷解决理念融入国际规则体系。
竞争力与仲裁高地。 在竞争力方面，文章提出三项实践要求：优化支持环境——司法对仲裁的支持与监督是仲裁健康发展的重要保障，各级法院依法履行司法审查职责、统一裁判标准、提高司法效率，是形成仲裁友好型司法环境的重要条件；加强涉外法治人才培养；推进仲裁数字化、智能化转型。文章还勾勒了建设仲裁高地的路径：北京可依托政治文化中心优势打造综合型国际仲裁服务高地；上海可依托国际金融中心地位建设金融仲裁品牌；粤港澳大湾区可发挥”一国两制三法域”独特优势，打造跨境争议解决优选地。
研讨会。 最高人民法院国际商事专家委员会第五届研讨会暨专家委员续聘活动，于 2026 年 9 月 9 日在上海举行，主题为”法治共融·协同创新·智链全球”。中华人民共和国首席大法官、最高人民法院院长张军出席并讲话。这是专家委员会成立以来参会人数最多、规模最大的一次盛会，国际商事专家委员及国际组织、国际仲裁机构、国际调解机构负责人等 200 余人线上线下深入研讨。
专家委员会的职能。 该机制可追溯至 2018 年 1 月，中央全面深化改革领导小组会议审议通过《关于建立”一带一路”国际商事争端解决机制和机构的意见》，提出最高人民法院设立国际商事法庭，牵头组建国际商事专家委员会。在该机制下，专家委员在当事人自愿基础上、受国际商事法庭委托调解国际商事纠纷；就人民法院审理国际商事纠纷案件所涉专门性法律问题提供咨询意见；并就国际商事法庭的规则修订及发展规划、最高人民法院制定相关司法解释及司法政策提供意见和建议。专家委员已受托出具多份域外法查明报告，共同编写《中国法院国际商事审判案例精要》系列丛书，并参与调解、专业咨询、域外法查明等工作。
续聘与规模。 最高人民法院决定继续聘任已到期的 37 位中外专家。截至目前，最高人民法院聘任了来自 25 个国家和地区的 62 位专家委员——对于合同适用外国法或争议涉及多个法域的当事人而言，这是一条可获取多法域意见的路径。
法院的成效与立场。 中华人民共和国二级大法官、最高人民法院审判委员会副部级专职委员王淑梅表示，2021 年至 2025 年，中国法院共审结一审涉外商事案件 12.8 万件，涉及 100 多个国家和地区；中国法院贯彻平等保护理念，推动构建公正、稳定、透明、可预期的国际贸易法治环境。最高人民法院民四庭庭长、第二国际商事法庭负责人沈红雨表示，近 40 年来，中国法院始终坚持”条约必须信守”原则，严格履行《纽约公约》义务，秉持”有利于裁决执行”的司法立场。
议题与观点。 研讨会设四个议题：国际商事仲裁现代化发展与《纽约公约》的适用应注意哪些问题；国际商事调解应怎样进一步创新发展；人工智能在国际商事争议解决机制中的应用与未来发展；护航国际产业链供应链稳定发展。香港国际仲裁中心名誉主席、亚太区域仲裁组织前主席杨良宜表示，各方要加强合作，保障仲裁裁决的有效执行。
对外资企业的实务意义
争议解决地的选择。 政策框架给出三种定位：北京的综合型国际仲裁服务高地、上海的金融仲裁品牌，以及粤港澳大湾区的跨境争议解决优选地。外资当事人可按交易类型匹配——金融类争议可考虑上海，带有香港或澳门因素的跨境争议可考虑大湾区，一般商事争议可考虑北京——同时须记住，这些属于政策方向，而非强制性管辖地的清单。对长期在中国有业务的集团而言，在合同争议解决条款起草阶段就把这一层考虑进去，往往比争议发生后再作选择更为主动。
“一站式”平台。 把诉讼、仲裁、调解纳入同一平台的衔接设计，意味着三条路径被设计为彼此衔接而非各自独立。对于希望维护商业关系的当事人而言，调解与仲裁、诉讼并行可选，是切实可用的选项。在争议早期引入调解，通常有助于控制时间与费用，也为后续可能的仲裁或诉讼保留空间。
域外法查明。 合同适用外国法时，专家委员会机制通过专家委员出具的域外法查明报告提供支持。这有助于降低跨境交易中适用法风险，宜在争议筹划阶段而非争议发生后才予考虑。对适用法与仲裁地、管辖法院需要一并权衡的跨境交易，这一机制的可用性值得在条款谈判时纳入评估。
裁决执行。 中国法院在《纽约公约》项下的司法立场——”条约必须信守”原则与”有利于裁决执行”的立场——对选择中国仲裁地、或需要在中国执行裁决的当事人直接相关。交易文件在设计争议解决条款时，若预期在中国执行，可据此评估执行环节的可预期性。
专家委员会不是什么。 该委员会不是仲裁机构，也不直接受理案件。专家委员仅在当事人自愿且受国际商事法庭委托的情况下进行调解，就专门性法律问题提供咨询意见，并就规则与司法政策提出建议。当事人不能向该委员会申请仲裁，该委员会也不出具仲裁裁决。准确理解其职能，对交易筹划与预期管理都很重要。
延伸阅读
- 中国国际商事仲裁：诉讼、仲裁与调解衔接的”一站式”平台。
- 仲裁司法审查与《纽约公约》项下的裁决执行。
- 域外法查明与最高人民法院国际商事法庭的角色。
- 国际商事仲裁中心建设：北京、上海与粤港澳大湾区。
来源
- 求是网·《构建具有国际竞争力的商事仲裁体系》（2026-10-02）：https://www.qstheory.cn/20261002/337d65e1bc89413085b0d17f714d3d96/c.html
- 光明网转《光明日报》2026-10-02 第 07 版同文：https://news.gmw.cn/2026-10/02/content_39030858.htm
- 《中国审判》·最高人民法院国际商事专家委员会第五届研讨会暨专家委员续聘活动：https://new.qq.com/rain/a/20261012A02ZC800
- 最高人民法院官网：https://www.court.gov.cn/
- 最高人民法院国际商事法庭官网：https://cicc.court.gov.cn/