MR. KABIR DUGGAL: I’d just invite everybody to take a look at Panel 3. Take a look at all the panels, but take a look at Panel 3 in particular, not just because they’re very attractive, which they all are, but this is sort of the face of arbitration. And you know we will very soon have introductions, and you’ll see pretty much everybody here has some form of diversity: different place, different origin, different agenda which is how I think the future of arbitration should be, so that’s the first point.
The second point: The topic of this panel is corruption after establishment: Should it disqualify otherwise meritorious claims? This is a contentious topic, a lot of people here are in practice, but this is intended to be a free forum for debate, and so the usual disclaimer, but particularly applicable to this panel: It does not reflect your personal views; it is done in the spirit of having a free and open exchange of important issues. One of the big criticisms is we never talk about substance; right? This is an effort to correct that.
My final privilege is to introduce our moderator Michael Nolan.
MR. MICHAEL NOLAN: Well, I appreciate the shortness of that introduction, in part, for a number of reasons given that I frequently listen to Kabir make introductions, and also because we really do have quite some meat to cover in this session, and we’ve had a little bit of restriction on our time, and I’d like very much for us to get on schedule because this is a meaty topic. There is a lot to it, and it’s a topic about which everybody can have opinions and thoughts, and they’re often well-grounded. That is because this is fundamentally about corruption, which is something we all experience and deal with, given the nature of these cases.
Let’s dig right in, and to that end, let me not introduce each of our panelists. You have some of their background in the printed materials.