ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the institutional practices and structural arrangements of dispute-resolution as practiced in Eastern and Western countries. At the root of these structural arrangements are unique philosophical foundations, arbitrator “role moralities,” as well as social and economic conditions that have given rise to unique perspectives on the role of the arbitrator and the aims of adjudication. The concept of “role moralities” (or internalized constraints) is described by Lon Fuller in his work The Morality of Law. Fuller argues that jurists, like all public offi cials, must meet certain expectations associated with their roles. These expectations are internalized as a “role morality” that shape and guide the actions of offi cials and constitute another form of implicit law. Such “role moralities” are distinct from individual personal moralities in that they provide a standard that applies to the discharge of a distinct social obligation.30
