Abstract:
Arbitration as part of ADR has been a preferred dispute resolution method in the international
commercial disputes as a result of its prevailing advantages of time, cost, flexibility,
confidentiality...etc. Recently, many nations have been setting exceptions to the consensual
nature and privity of arbitration for the sake of third parties interest protection by allowing
exceptional circumstances and by using third party theories. Ethiopia in the hope of modernizing
the arbitration system had become a party to the New York convention and enacted a new
arbitration and conciliation proclamation. The proclamation has ostensibly accepted third parties
to involve in the form of intervention, joinder and opposition. But, it also set a barricade of
unanimous consent from the main parties and the third party, which would be acceptable if the
business community was cooperative for justice and fairness. Furthermore, it failed to set
procedural rules for joinder of third parties as the civil procedure code provisions are not fit to
the uniqueness of the nature of arbitral proceeding. Even though, the proclamation aimed at
minimizing unsolicited court interference it gave the power to entertain opposition to it. The
thesis used doctrinal and comparative analysis methodology and employed qualitative
approaches to data collection, analysis and interpretation. The finding of the thesis entails that
the law and especially the practice are unfriendly to multi-party arbitration despite the
advantages it has towards the effectiveness of arbitration system. Thus, the law should be better
equipped towards protecting third parties interests and making a competent and effective
arbitration hub
