The tenure of its director, Suriyadi Halim Omar, ended on Dec 1 last year.

Bar president Karen Cheah said that any further delay in the appointment could have “potentially detrimental consequences” for parties which depended on adjudication and arbitration as a means of dispute resolution.

Cheah said that the director’s approval is necessary at almost every level of AIAC’s proceedings.

Without a director, the arbitration centre faced various problems such as the inability to register new arbitrations and appointment of arbitrators. This hampered ongoing arbitrations and awards could not be delivered.

“The importance of the position of the director cannot be overstated,” she said in a statement.

“The current situation (vacancy of the director’s position) is untenable and only serves to erode public confidence in our country’s forefront alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism.

“Until and unless the vacancy is filled, parties who need their ADR needs handled expeditiously may have to opt for arbitration centres in other jurisdictions, such as the Singapore International Arbitration Centre or Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre.”

Cheah said the six-week-long vacancy raised serious concerns about the administration of justice as it disrupted claims under the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 (CIPAA), where the AIAC is the sole administering authority.

Without a director, affected parties were deprived of their rights under CIPAA, which is to facilitate speedy resolution of disputes to ensure cash flow in the construction industry, she said.

Cheah said the uncertainty surrounding the appointment of a new director would only fuel the public’s disillusionment with the ADR process.