1. Introduction

In recent decades, China’s remarkable economic growth has transformed it into a global power and a norm-setting actor in the realm of international trade and investment. One of the most prominent manifestations of this role is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), unveiled in 2013. Conceived to connect Asia, Europe, and Africa through a vast network of infrastructure, this megaproject is more than an economic blueprint; it is widely regarded as an effort by Beijing to rebalance the global normative order and promote its own values. The sheer scale of the BRI and the high volume of trade and investment it generates have naturally created a fertile ground for complex legal disputes among states, investors, and private entities. In response to this need and to manage these disputes, China established the China International Commercial Court (CICC) in 2018. This institution, created as part of China’s broader strategy to develop its own approach to dispute resolution in international cases, is the central focus of this research. This article seeks to answer the primary question: How is the “Chinese approach to dispute resolution” reflected in the structure and operation of the China International Commercial Court?

2. Research Gap and Objective

Despite growing attention to the Belt and Road Initiative, in-depth legal analyses of its derivative institutions, particularly the CICC, remain limited in Persian legal literature. The principal research problem is the existing gap in understanding the nature, structure, and function of the CICC as a manifestation of the “Chinese approach to dispute resolution.” As the world witnesses the rise of international commercial courts as rivals or complements to international arbitration, the Chinese model, with its unique features, raises critical questions: To what extent is the CICC a standard international judicial body, and to what extent is it an instrument for advancing China’s geopolitical and normative objectives? Understanding this duality and analyzing the court’s specific characteristics (such as its emphasis on mediation, the reservation of judicial posts for Chinese nationals, and the creation of an International Commercial Expert Committee) is of strategic importance for countries involved in the BRI, including Iran. This research aims to fill this gap by providing a detailed analysis of this institution and evaluating it from the perspective of international commercial law and the interests of the involved parties.

3. Methodology

This research employs a descriptive-analytical methodology. The descriptive component, drawing on library resources such as scholarly articles, books, official documents from the Supreme People’s Court of China (e.g., CICC’s founding provisions, procedural rules, and expert committee regulations), and reports from international bodies, outlines the CICC’s foundational principles, objectives, structure, and functions. The analytical component examines the court’s unique features, such as its “one-stop diversified dispute resolution platform” and the role of its legal personnel, in light of relevant legal theories (like the “multi-door courthouse” concept) and through a comparative lens with other international commercial courts (such as those in Singapore and Dubai). This comparative approach helps to highlight the innovations and challenges of the Chinese model, thereby laying the groundwork for a comprehensive assessment.

4. Key Findings

The research findings indicate that the Chinese approach to dispute resolution is systematically woven into the fabric of the CICC. The most significant findings are:

a) Innovative Structure: The CICC presents a unique model by integrating a triad of “mediation, arbitration, and litigation” into a single “one-stop diversified dispute resolution platform.” This model, inspired by the “multi-door courthouse” theory, is distinguished from other international courts by its special emphasis on mediation, a dispute resolution method with deep cultural roots in China.

b) Dual Approach to Internationalization: On one hand, by restricting judgeships to Chinese nationals, the CICC adopts a conservative stance on national sovereignty. On the other hand, to compensate for this limitation and enhance its international character, it has innovated the “International Commercial Expert Committee,” composed of distinguished international jurists who serve in an advisory and mediatory capacity.

c) Performance Based on Pragmatism: Although the court’s structural dependence on the Chinese judicial system raises theoretical challenges regarding its independence and impartiality, initial performance data reveals that its judgments have not invariably favored Chinese parties. This suggests a pragmatic effort to build international credibility and demonstrate the institution’s effectiveness.

5. Contribution to the Field

This article contributes to the existing body of knowledge in international business law and Chinese legal studies in several ways. First, by offering a comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of the CICC in Persian, it fills a significant gap in the domestic legal literature. Second, moving beyond mere description, the research provides a deeper understanding of China’s legal strategies on the international stage by analyzing the dual nature of the CICC (as both a dispute resolution body and a norm-setting instrument). Third, by practically evaluating the court from the perspective of a foreign party (such as Iran), it offers actionable recommendations for legal and commercial practitioners, avoiding a purely theoretical analysis. The article demonstrates that the Chinese approach is a composite of structural innovation, adherence to sovereign principles, and pragmatism, the understanding of which is essential for effective engagement with China.

6. Implications and Applications

The findings of this research have significant theoretical and practical implications. At the theoretical level, the study enriches the discourse on the proliferation of international dispute resolution bodies and the competition between different models (arbitration versus state-run courts). At the practical level, this article provides a functional guide for Iranian policymakers, lawyers, and business professionals who interact with Chinese counterparts. Key implications include:

a) For Policymakers: The necessity of adopting an informed legal policy towards China’s new judicial institutions and considering them in bilateral negotiations and agreements.

b) For Lawyers and Legal Advisors: The imperative of thoroughly understanding the dispute resolution options in contracts with Chinese parties; while international arbitration may remain the preferred option, the CICC and especially its mediation capacity should not be overlooked.

c) For Commercial Enterprises: An awareness of the risks and opportunities associated with the CICC and the importance of drafting precise and intelligent dispute resolution clauses in contracts.

7. Conclusion

The China International Commercial Court is more than a judicial body; it is a manifestation of China’s effort to present a “Chinese approach to dispute resolution” on the global stage and a key component of its grand strategy within the Belt and Road Initiative. With its innovative structure centered on mediation, and despite challenges to its independence, the court has demonstrated a pragmatic performance. For an Iranian party, although international arbitration remains the safer option, the CICC is a growing reality whose thorough understanding and preparedness to engage with are a strategic necessity. Comprehending this trajectory is vital not only for risk management but also for creating opportunities in commercial relations with China.