Originally from World Arbitration and Mediation Review

How does the role of the arbitrator shape his or her professional and ethical responsibilities? If the role of the arbitrator is that of a service provider, does the arbitrator need do no more than provide a fair process and render a decision that can be executed and enforced?  If the arbitrator’s role is that of an adjudicator, does the arbitrator have a broader set of responsibilities, such as obligations to provide reasons, apply the law and arbitral precedents, impose mandatory rules different from the governing law, and investigate possible corruption or fraud? Further, are immunity rules more justifiable when the arbitrator is an adjudicator and less justifiable if the arbitrator is a service provider?