NEWSLETTER-2020-metin

237 ARBITRATION LAW form in the second paragraph, and whether the smart contracts fulfill this written condition is a big question. For this reason, the binding character of an arbitral award is not in a position to be an alternative to the existing legal system and gives rise to many questions. Conclusion Many envisage that the blockchain system will enable transac- tions to be carried out quickly and efficiently. A fast and cost-friendly arbitration is deemed as one of the possible benefits of this technol- ogy. However, the risks of the blockchain system should be correctly evaluated. In the current situation, although blockchain technology promises attractive solutions, it is not yet an alternative to classical arbitration, mostly because of enforcement problems. In addition, the operation and procedural aspects of the process are not fully deter- mined and available. The applicable law and competence are other questions regarding the process to be carried out through a blockchain. Lastly, there is no example world-wide as to the settlement of a dispute arising from smart contracts through arbitration. Institutional arbitration centers have not yet established rules to this end. Therefore, it remains a mystery as to how the process will proceed. On the other hand, in today’s world where adaptation to technology increases ex- ponentially, it is inevitable to discuss the effects of these and similar systems in the world of law.