JEAIL > Volume 18(2); 2025 > Issue Focus
Research Paper
Published online: November 30, 2025
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2025.18.2.01

Arbitrator Impartiality and Academic Expression: The Ukraine v. Russia Case in PCA

Chao Wang
University of Macau Faculty of Law
E32-2010, Avenida da Universidade, Taipa, Macau SAR, China.
Corresponding Author: chaowang@um.edu.mo

ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/liceInha University Law School, 100 Inharo, Michuhol-gu, Incheon 22212 Korea. / nses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract
This article examines the 2024 decision in Ukraine v. Russia (PCA Case No. 2019-28), in which a United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea tribunal upheld challenges to two arbitrators – Donald McRae and Rüdiger Wolfrum – due to their prior support for a 2022 L’Institut de Droit International’s Declaration condemning Russian aggression. The tribunal found that the involvement of these arbitrators raised justifiable doubts as to impartiality, highlighting the expanding role of perceived bias in inter-State arbitration. In a forceful dissent, Christopher Greenwood cautioned against conflating general academic expression with prejudgment, emphasizing the need for judicial restraint and procedural integrity. This note explores the tribunal’s reasoning, dissenting views, procedural standards, and comparative jurisprudence, including Canfor v. USA and Perenco v. Ecuador. It reflects on the growing tension between academic freedom and arbitrator impartiality, evolving disclosure norms, and the risk of strategic challenges in politically sensitive disputes, with implications for the future practice of international adjudication.

Keywords : PCA Case 2919-28, Arbitrator Impartiality, Russia-Ukraine Case, Academic Freedom and Judicial Bias, UNCLOS, IDI Declaration, Reasonable Observer

View the Full Text