Comparative Analysis of the Challenges in the Enforcement of Judicial Judgments and Arbitral Awards on Public Blockchain Networks: A Perspective from UNCITRAL and Iranian Law

Abstract

The comparative analysis of the challenges associated with the enforcement of judicial judgments and arbitral awards on public blockchain networks constitutes an emerging field at the intersection of international commercial law and distributed ledger technologies (DLT). It examines the extent to which sovereign and judicial authority may be exercised over digital assets within decentralized environments. The central issue addressed in this study is the fundamental conflict between the intrinsic characteristics of public blockchains—such as immutability, pseudonymity, and their inherently cross-border nature—and the enforcement requirements of judicial and arbitral systems, which traditionally rely upon third-party intervention, territorial jurisdiction, and the possibility of reversing or invalidating transactions. In the absence of a central authority, public blockchain networks present significant technical and legal obstacles to the compulsory seizure, transfer, or execution against digital assets. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology with a comparative legal approach, this research examines the legal instruments and proposed frameworks developed by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), including the Model Law on Electronic Commerce and the Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records, and compares them with the relevant provisions of Iranian legislation, particularly the Civil Judgments Enforcement Act and the Electronic Commerce Act. The identified research gap arises from the predominant focus of previous scholarship on the legal nature of smart contracts, while largely overlooking the operational complexities of enforcing judicial and arbitral decisions at the technical layer of blockchain systems. Addressing this gap is essential to ensuring legal certainty for stakeholders and maintaining transactional stability within the digital economy. The findings indicate that, notwithstanding UNCITRAL's recognition of the principle of functional equivalence, a substantial gap remains between the legal validity of judicial judgments and arbitral awards and their technical enforceability on public blockchain networks. Likewise, under Iranian law, the absence of a comprehensive legal framework defining digital assets as property, coupled with the lack of statutory mechanisms enabling judicial access to private cryptographic keys, significantly undermines the effectiveness of traditional enforcement procedures. The study ultimately recommends that, in order to align the Iranian legal system with global technological developments, concepts such as judicial oracles and governable smart contracts should be formally recognized, while the necessary technical infrastructure should be established to facilitate direct interaction between judicial authorities and decentralized blockchain networks.