On 5 June 2026, the St Petersburg International Economic Forum hosted the session “Arbitration as a Magnet for Capital: Jurisdictions Competing for Business Disputes”. During the discussion, Dimitry Afanasiev, co-founder of EPAM Law Office, proposed measures aimed at strengthening the competitiveness of Russian jurisdiction in providing effective judicial protection for Russian companies. These measures included changing the approach to evidence-gathering, expanding the scope for Russian courts to hear claims in disputes involving foreign defendants, and building a track record of subsequent enforcement of Russian court judgments in friendly jurisdictions.
The session was opened by Vladimir Gruzdev, Chairman of the Board of the Association of Lawyers of Russia, who noted that, in today’s economy, the quality of an effective dispute resolution system is becoming a genuine competitive advantage for a country. After introducing the speakers, Gruzdev invited the participants to discuss how arbitration centres are becoming fully fledged business infrastructure capable of attracting investment.
At the outset, Boris Boltyansky, Editor-in-Chief of Pravo.ru, presented a study of the arbitration disputes market involving Russian parties. He noted that, according to the findings, the five leading international arbitration centres collectively handle disputes worth approximately USD 250 billion per year. Since 2014, however, Russian companies have gradually been shifting towards Russian and Asian arbitration centres due to sanctions restrictions and declining trust in Western institutions. The factors influencing the choice of arbitration forum included the neutrality and friendliness of the venue, the ability to make payments under sanctions restrictions, the existence of sanctions-related clauses, and the prospects for enforcing awards.
Opening his remarks, Dimitry Afanasiev acknowledged the extensive work carried out in recent years by the Russian Ministry of Justice to make Russian jurisdiction more attractive. This work includes the reform of arbitral proceedings and the preparation of a draft law allowing state courts to issue writs of execution for interim measures ordered by arbitral tribunals.
At the same time, Afanasiev pointed to continuing procedural challenges, identifying evidence-gathering as one of the key issues. He proposed introducing a discovery procedure — a mechanism for the collection and disclosure of evidence used in the Anglo-American legal system. In his view, this would improve the quality of Russian court judgments and strengthen the prospects for their enforcement abroad.
Afanasiev also noted that, against the backdrop of existing restrictions, many Russian companies had lost the ability to protect their rights effectively in foreign jurisdictions. In these circumstances, it is important to expand the ability of Russian courts to hear claims in disputes involving foreign defendants, including damages claims and tort actions, and to ensure the subsequent enforcement of court judgments in friendly jurisdictions, including countries of the Global South. By way of example, Afanasiev cited Brazil, where, he said, 100% of Russian court judgments had been enforced over the past century.
Continuing the discussion, Elena Borisenko, Deputy Chair of the Management Board of Gazprombank, agreed that the world had “proved to be far broader” than it had appeared ten years ago: arbitration is developing rapidly in the countries of the Global South and in China, while the BRICS countries are increasingly shaping new dispute resolution centres.
According to Borisenko, capital flows to places where commercial benefit is balanced by legal protection. In this context, she emphasised that, thanks to the reforms being carried out in Russia, investors can expect disputes to be heard properly, clearly and fairly.
Borisenko also highlighted the issue of trust in international arbitration under sanctions. She said that, after leading institutions began restricting access to justice on the basis of extra-legal sanctions measures, businesses developed mistrust around the disclosure of information and concerns about its confidentiality. Borisenko noted that Russia has an opportunity to improve its procedural legislation, including approaches to evidence, and to strengthen confidentiality requirements. If this is done, she said, Russia could become a jurisdiction of choice for the resolution of commercial disputes.
In his remarks, Alexey Khersontsev, State Secretary and Deputy Minister of Economic Development of the Russian Federation, stressed that dispute resolution infrastructure is as much a part of the investment climate as the tax rate or the speed of customs clearance. He said that this was why the national target model for business conditions includes a separate area devoted to dispute resolution, comprising 31 measures and five indicators. Khersontsev identified the acceleration of judgment enforcement, the development of arbitration and mediation, and the introduction of adjudication to support major industrial projects as key priorities.
Victoria Burkovskaya, Co-Chair of the Centre for Public Procedures “Business Against Corruption”, focused on the consequences of sanctions pressure for the protection of Russian assets abroad, as well as on the formation of parallel legal regimes in Russia and Western jurisdictions. She paid particular attention to the issue of the real enforceability of court judgments.
Ivan Zykin, Deputy Chairman of the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation, noted the growing role of Russian arbitral institutions amid restricted access to a number of foreign arbitration bodies. According to him, the ICAC remains one of the most sought-after arbitration institutions for disputes involving Russian parties: in 2025, the ICAC heard 337 international cases. Zykin cited the institution’s highly qualified arbitrators, efficient proceedings and relatively low arbitration costs among its advantages.
Tatiana Sizova, Business Ombudsperson for the Protection of Entrepreneurs’ Rights in Moscow, spoke from the business perspective, identifying its key expectations of arbitration: predictability, speed and enforceability of decisions. Among practical measures, she mentioned accelerating procedures and providing more active clarification of the simplified procedure for hearing cases. She also supported the Ministry of Justice’s proposal to recognise a final arbitral award as an enforceable instrument.
Summing up the discussion, Konstantin Chuychenko, Minister of Justice of the Russian Federation, spoke about the work being done to create a BRICS arbitration mechanism for commercial disputes, noting that this had become a realistic prospect involving the mutual recognition of decisions. In closing, the minister emphasised the complex nature of the challenges facing arbitration. He concluded that the further development of an effective system is impossible “without resolving many of the problems discussed today by Dimitry Afanasiev”, as well as by the other participants, and invited everyone to continue the discussion at the 14th St Petersburg International Legal Forum at the end of June.
