See below English version.
Luis Miguel Díaz
Luis Miguel Díaz fue mi amigo, por muchas razones vive en mi memoria; entre ellas por su talento y bondad. Apoyó con entusiasmo la paz entre los hombres, la mediación, el arbitraje y el derecho uniforme. Su temprana muerte fue un triste acontecimiento; lo extrañamos y pedimos por él.
En 1991 Luis Miguel fue designado Consultor Jurídico de la SRE. Desde que inició sus funciones, me comentó la importancia de que México incorporara la LMA.
La apertura de México a la inversión extranjera y las negociaciones del Tratado de Libre Comercio del América del Norte (TLCAN), exigían que México ofreciera al mundo una regulación moderna del arbitraje comercial; el Franckestein de 1989 era un obstáculo.
Luis Miguel me citó a su oficina para considerar como se podría poner en vigor la LMA. Le platiqué la experiencia de la reforma del 89 y le manifesté mi opinión de que convenía proponer la LMA, exclusivamente, a los asesores; y, de ser posible, no a todos. Me pidió que redactara una propuesta de adopción para someterla a los asesores. Revisó su agenda, fijó la fecha y me dijo: ‘tienes un día para sacarla”.
Lo que se debe, y no se debe, hacer
Incorporar una ley modelo no es una tarea de copiar y pegar. Hay un buen número de tareas, a saber: (i) llenar los blancos entre corchetes; (ii) escoger entre las alternativas que propone la ley modelo; (iii) decidir el lugar del sistema legal nacional en que debe colocarse; (iv) considerar si algunos artículos se pueden modificar; (v) considerar si conviene modificar algunos artículos que pudieran modificarse, aunque ya no esté muy bien; (vi) estar preparado para oponerse bravíamente a lo que de plano no se debe modificar; y, (vi) determinar la legislación de implementación que debe acompañar el cambio.
Los entrecorchetados
Las leyes modelo suelen tener blancos encorchetados, para que el legislador nacional los llene de acuerdo con su sistema. El texto de la LMA de 1989, por ejemplo, tiene el artículo 6, donde el legislador nacional debe determinar el tribunal o autoridad para el cumplimiento de determinadas funciones de asistencia y supervisión durante el arbitraje. Hay otras que tienen mayor número; por ejemplo, la Ley modelo de la CNUDMI sobre la insolvencia transfronteriza, tiene mas de veinticinco.
Un buen ejemplo está en la Ley modelo de la CNUDMI sobre la conciliación comercial internacional (LMCI), relativo al procedimiento de ejecución de los convenios de transacción; el artículo 14 dice: "[S]i las partes llegan a un acuerdo por el que se resuelva la controversia, dicho artículo será susceptible de ejecución …[Los Estados promulgantes podrán incorporar una descripción del medio de ejecución de los acuerdos de transacción o remitirse a las disposiciones que rijan su obligatoriedad)”.
Las alternativas
Algunas leyes modelo ofrecen alternativas. La LMA se elaboró para regular el arbitraje internacional. Lo óptimo era que cada Estado tuviera una ley única, pero lo práctico era ofrecer una ley para el arbitraje internacional y permitir a los legisladores incorporar una ley uniforme sin modificar su legislación interna.
México puso el ejemplo; hasta donde estoy informado fue el primer país que adoptó la LMA como la ley única del arbitraje comercial, nacional e internacional. Los tiempos cambian y ahora la UNCITRAL recomienda la adopción de sistemas unitarios; una sola ley para los negocios nacionales y los internacionales. La guía de incorporación de la LMCI, sugiere los cambios que se deben hacer para tales efectos. Incluso, ha elaborado leyes que no tienen el requisito de internacionalidad; por ejemplo, la Ley modelo sobre el comercio electrónico (LMCE).
En ocasiones no se puede llegar a un acuerdo y la UNCITRAL, sea en el texto de la ley o en una nota de pie de página, ofrece alternativas. La versión de 2006 de la LMA, permite adoptar una definición flexible de la forma escrita del acuerdo de arbitraje; o prescindir del requisito de forma (artículo 7). La LMCI, también, ofrece un artículo opcional sobre el término de la prescripción (artículo X. Suspensión del plazo de prescripción)
Colocación en el sistema legal
El lugar en que debe quedar la ley modelo dentro del sistema jurídico nacional, es importante. Por ejemplo, la recomendación original fue que la LMA fuera una ley autónoma de arbitraje. La finalidad era subrayar que el arbitraje no es una instancia judicial, cuasi judicial, o auxiliar de la justicia judicial. Al final, la iniciativa se presentó como adición al Libro Quinto del Código de Comercio, que se refiere a los juicios mercantiles. El cambio no dejó de tener consecuencias inapropiadas, que en futuras entradas comentaré.
Lo que se puede y lo que no se puede
Algunos artículos se pueden modificar sin causar graves problemas; por ejemplo, el artículo 10 sobre el número de árbitros, en ausencia de acuerdo de las partes, establece que serán tres; el Cco, dice que será uno (artículo artículo 1426)]. Para apartarse del modelo es esencial conocer a fondo la ley modelo; un experto puede tener ideas excelentes, pero aquí el valor a preservar es la uniformidad.
Hay otros artículos o disposiciones que se pueden modificar, pero que ya no es recomendable porque el alejamiento de la ley modelo se subraya. Un ejemplo sería si se establece la obligación del árbitro de designar siempre un perito para dirimir las diferencias de los peritajes de las partes; en la LMA es discrecional para el tribunal (artículo 26).
Hay disposiciones cuya modificación, permisible para el legislador nacional, no es permisible desde el punto de vista del derecho uniforme. Por ejemplo, una disposición que hiciera aplicable supletoriamente las disposiciones del código de procedimiento judicial.
Legislación de Implementación
Finalmente, tenemos la legislación que es necesaria implementar para la puesta en vigor. Por ejemplo, establecer los cauces procesales para atender los casos de colaboración y control del arbitraje ¿En que vía procesal se dirime la nulidad, el reconocimiento y la ejecución de los laudos?
Guías de implementación
Con el tiempo, la UNCITRAL adquirió experiencia. El mundo necesita guías para implementar las leyes modelo. A partir de la LMCE, en 1996, la UNCITRAL comenzó a preparar guías de incorporación. Las guías de incorporación han evolucionado y, hoy en día, con la bendición de la Comisión, la Secretaría publica guías de incorporación y comentario. Son resúmenes de los trabajos preparatorios, que pueden ser útiles no solo para la incorporación, sino, también, para la interpretación.
Por ejemplo, la LMA se acompañó sólo con todos los trabajos preparatorios. Las modificaciones a la LMA de 2006, ya tienen una guía. Esa guía fue complementada con una nota explicativa de la LMA que la UNCITRAL publicó con la finalidad de promover su adopción por los Estados.
------------
Luis Miguel Díaz
Luis Miguel Díaz was my friend; he lives in my memory for many reasons, amongst them because of his talent and goodness. He was an enthusiastic supporter of peace amongst men, mediation, arbitration and uniform law. His early demise was a sad happening; we miss him and pray for him.
In 1991 Luis Miguel was appointed as Legal Consultant for the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE for its acronym in Spanish). Since he came to office, he told me how important it was for Mexico to incorporate the UMLA.
Mexico’s opening up to foreign investment and the negotiations of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) demanded that Mexico offered to the world a modern regulation of commercial arbitration; the 1989 Frankenstein was an obstacle.
Luis Miguel summoned me to his office to discuss how the UMLA could be brought into force. I told him about the experience of the 1989 amendment and I expressed my opinion that it would be convenient to propose the UMLA exclusively to the advisers; and, if possible, not to all of them. He asked me to write a draft proposal for the enactment in order to bring it before the advisors. He flipped through his daily planner, set a date and told me: ‘you have one day to get it through’.
What must, and must not, be done
The enactment of a model law is not a copy and paste job. There are a good number of tasks, namely (i) fill in the blanks in the brackets, (ii) choose between the alternatives proposed by the model law; (iii) decide the location within the national legal order where it shall be placed; (iv) consider if some articles may be modified; (v) consider if it is convenient to modify some articles which may be modified, even if it is not recommendable; (vi) be ready to bravely oppose changes to what should by no means be modified; and, (vii) determine the enactment legislation which must accompany the change.
The brackets
Model laws leave blanks in brackets, in order for national legislators to fill them in according to their system. The 1985 UMLA text, for example, has article 6, where the national legislator must specify the court or other authority competent to perform certain functions of assistance and supervision during the arbitral proceedings. There are others which have a greater number of blanks in brackets; for example, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency has more than twenty-five.
Some model laws offer alternatives. The UMLA was created to regulate international arbitration. The ideal was for each State to have one single law, but the practical thing to do was to offer a law concerning international arbitration and to allow the national legislators to incorporate a uniform law without modifying their internal legislation.
Mexico set the example; as far as I know it was the first country to adopt the UMLA as its only law for commercial arbitration, national and international. Times change and now the UNCITRAL recommends the adoption of unitary systems; a single law for national and international transactions. The UMLIC guide to enactment suggests the changes that must be done to that effect. The UNCITRAL has even come up with laws that no longer require an element of internationality; for example, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (UMLEC).
There are times when it is not possible to reach an agreement and the UNCITRAL, either on the body of the law or in a footnote, offers alternatives. The 2006 amendments to the UMLA, allow for the adoption of a flexible definition of the written form requirement of the arbitration agreement or for a definition that altogether omits any form requirement (article 7). The UMLIC, also, offers and optional article for States that might wish to adopt a provision on the suspension of the limitation period (article X. Suspension of limitation period).
Placement within the national legal order
The location within the national legal order where the model law shall be placed is important. For example, in the Mexican case, the original recommendation was to make the UMLA an autonomous arbitration law. The purpose of it was to stress that arbitration is not a judicial or quasi-judicial instance or an aid for judicial justice. In the end, the bill was presented as an addition to the Fifth Book of the Code of Commerce (Cco) which refers to commercial trials. Such change was not without inappropriate consequences, which I will discuss in future entries.
What can be, and what cannot be
Some articles may be modified without causing serious problems; for example, article 10, which refers to the number of arbitrators, states that failing a determination from the parties, the number of arbitrators shall be three; the Cco states that it shall be one (article 1426). In order to deviate from the model it is essential to know the model law in depth; an expert may have excellent ideas, but what is valuable here is to preserve uniformity.
There are other articles or provisions which can be modified, but it is not recommendable to do so since the deviation from the model law is emphasized. An example would be if an obligation of the arbitrator is established to always designate an expert to settle differences between the parties’ experts; in the UMLA it is optional for the arbitral tribunal to do so (article 26).
Even if it is allowed for the national legislator to modify certain provisions, it is not permissible to do so from a uniform law point of view. For example, a provision which made it possible to supplementally apply the terms of a judicial code of procedure.
Enactment legislation
Finally, we come to the legislation which is necessary to implement the entry into force. For example, to establish the procedural avenues with which to deal with cases of collaboration and control of arbitration. In what procedural route should the application for setting aside an arbitral award or to recognize and enforce it be settled?
Guides to enact
With time, the UNCITRAL acquired experience. The world needed guides to enact the model laws. Since the UMLEC, in 1996, the UNCITRAL began to prepare guides to enact. The guides to enact have evolved and, today, with the Commission’s blessing, the Secretariat publishes guides to enact and commentaries. They are summaries of the preparatory works, which can be useful not only to enact a model law, but also to interpret it.
For example, the UMLA was only accompanied by all the preparatory works. The 2006 amendments to the UMLA however, have a guide. That guide was complemented with an explanatory note to the UMLA which the UNCITRAL have published in order to promote its adoption by the States.
------------
How to Eat a Model Law. Guide to Enactment in a Nutshell.
Luis Miguel Díaz
Luis Miguel Díaz was my friend; he lives in my memory for many reasons, amongst them because of his talent and goodness. He was an enthusiastic supporter of peace amongst men, mediation, arbitration and uniform law. His early demise was a sad happening; we miss him and pray for him.
In 1991 Luis Miguel was appointed as Legal Consultant for the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE for its acronym in Spanish). Since he came to office, he told me how important it was for Mexico to incorporate the UMLA.
Mexico’s opening up to foreign investment and the negotiations of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) demanded that Mexico offered to the world a modern regulation of commercial arbitration; the 1989 Frankenstein was an obstacle.
Luis Miguel summoned me to his office to discuss how the UMLA could be brought into force. I told him about the experience of the 1989 amendment and I expressed my opinion that it would be convenient to propose the UMLA exclusively to the advisers; and, if possible, not to all of them. He asked me to write a draft proposal for the enactment in order to bring it before the advisors. He flipped through his daily planner, set a date and told me: ‘you have one day to get it through’.
What must, and must not, be done
The enactment of a model law is not a copy and paste job. There are a good number of tasks, namely (i) fill in the blanks in the brackets, (ii) choose between the alternatives proposed by the model law; (iii) decide the location within the national legal order where it shall be placed; (iv) consider if some articles may be modified; (v) consider if it is convenient to modify some articles which may be modified, even if it is not recommendable; (vi) be ready to bravely oppose changes to what should by no means be modified; and, (vii) determine the enactment legislation which must accompany the change.
The brackets
Model laws leave blanks in brackets, in order for national legislators to fill them in according to their system. The 1985 UMLA text, for example, has article 6, where the national legislator must specify the court or other authority competent to perform certain functions of assistance and supervision during the arbitral proceedings. There are others which have a greater number of blanks in brackets; for example, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency has more than twenty-five.
A good example can be found in the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation (UMLIC), in reference to the method of enforcing settlement agreements; article 14 states: “If the parties conclude an agreement settling a dispute, that settlement agreement is binding and enforceable . . . [the enacting State may insert a description of the method of enforcing settlement agreements or refer to provisions governing such enforcement].”
The alternativesSome model laws offer alternatives. The UMLA was created to regulate international arbitration. The ideal was for each State to have one single law, but the practical thing to do was to offer a law concerning international arbitration and to allow the national legislators to incorporate a uniform law without modifying their internal legislation.
Mexico set the example; as far as I know it was the first country to adopt the UMLA as its only law for commercial arbitration, national and international. Times change and now the UNCITRAL recommends the adoption of unitary systems; a single law for national and international transactions. The UMLIC guide to enactment suggests the changes that must be done to that effect. The UNCITRAL has even come up with laws that no longer require an element of internationality; for example, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (UMLEC).
There are times when it is not possible to reach an agreement and the UNCITRAL, either on the body of the law or in a footnote, offers alternatives. The 2006 amendments to the UMLA, allow for the adoption of a flexible definition of the written form requirement of the arbitration agreement or for a definition that altogether omits any form requirement (article 7). The UMLIC, also, offers and optional article for States that might wish to adopt a provision on the suspension of the limitation period (article X. Suspension of limitation period).
Placement within the national legal order
The location within the national legal order where the model law shall be placed is important. For example, in the Mexican case, the original recommendation was to make the UMLA an autonomous arbitration law. The purpose of it was to stress that arbitration is not a judicial or quasi-judicial instance or an aid for judicial justice. In the end, the bill was presented as an addition to the Fifth Book of the Code of Commerce (Cco) which refers to commercial trials. Such change was not without inappropriate consequences, which I will discuss in future entries.
What can be, and what cannot be
Some articles may be modified without causing serious problems; for example, article 10, which refers to the number of arbitrators, states that failing a determination from the parties, the number of arbitrators shall be three; the Cco states that it shall be one (article 1426). In order to deviate from the model it is essential to know the model law in depth; an expert may have excellent ideas, but what is valuable here is to preserve uniformity.
There are other articles or provisions which can be modified, but it is not recommendable to do so since the deviation from the model law is emphasized. An example would be if an obligation of the arbitrator is established to always designate an expert to settle differences between the parties’ experts; in the UMLA it is optional for the arbitral tribunal to do so (article 26).
Even if it is allowed for the national legislator to modify certain provisions, it is not permissible to do so from a uniform law point of view. For example, a provision which made it possible to supplementally apply the terms of a judicial code of procedure.
Enactment legislation
Finally, we come to the legislation which is necessary to implement the entry into force. For example, to establish the procedural avenues with which to deal with cases of collaboration and control of arbitration. In what procedural route should the application for setting aside an arbitral award or to recognize and enforce it be settled?
With time, the UNCITRAL acquired experience. The world needed guides to enact the model laws. Since the UMLEC, in 1996, the UNCITRAL began to prepare guides to enact. The guides to enact have evolved and, today, with the Commission’s blessing, the Secretariat publishes guides to enact and commentaries. They are summaries of the preparatory works, which can be useful not only to enact a model law, but also to interpret it.
For example, the UMLA was only accompanied by all the preparatory works. The 2006 amendments to the UMLA however, have a guide. That guide was complemented with an explanatory note to the UMLA which the UNCITRAL have published in order to promote its adoption by the States.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario