The article discusses the harmonization of the legal framework for online arbitration, emphasizing its importance in resolving disputes in a digital environment. The program, designed to assist courts in resolving disputes, allows parties to resolve conflicts confidentially, quickly, and impartially, with worldwide enforceability. The introduction of information technologies in this field is highlighted, particularly in the context of international trade and investment disputes, which have increased significantly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The article reviews the current legal framework, including the Civil Code of Uzbekistan, the Economic Procedure Code, and various decrees and resolutions aimed at enhancing the investment environment and improving the legal system. It also discusses the role of the Tashkent International Arbitration Center (TIAC) and the Model Law, which provides a uniform legal framework for international economic arbitration, offering clarity and reducing ambiguities. The author suggests that a specific universal set of rules for online arbitration is necessary to ensure full, specific, efficient, and modern regulation. The article explores the advantages and disadvantages of international agreements and model laws in achieving harmonization. While international treaties can provide a high level of harmonization, they may be slow to develop and require significant legislative changes. Model laws, on the other hand, are more flexible and easier to implement, making them a convenient approach to unifying online arbitration. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of integrating ADR/ODR processes into the traditional court system to expand access to justice. It references the Civil Courts Framework Review in the UK, which proposes the creation of a new online court with mandatory jurisdiction over claims up to £25,000. The article also discusses the role of key stakeholders, such as governments, businesses, and consumer organizations, in developing an ODR framework, highlighting their common interests and differences in views on ODR.The article discusses the harmonization of the legal framework for online arbitration, emphasizing its importance in resolving disputes in a digital environment. The program, designed to assist courts in resolving disputes, allows parties to resolve conflicts confidentially, quickly, and impartially, with worldwide enforceability. The introduction of information technologies in this field is highlighted, particularly in the context of international trade and investment disputes, which have increased significantly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The article reviews the current legal framework, including the Civil Code of Uzbekistan, the Economic Procedure Code, and various decrees and resolutions aimed at enhancing the investment environment and improving the legal system. It also discusses the role of the Tashkent International Arbitration Center (TIAC) and the Model Law, which provides a uniform legal framework for international economic arbitration, offering clarity and reducing ambiguities. The author suggests that a specific universal set of rules for online arbitration is necessary to ensure full, specific, efficient, and modern regulation. The article explores the advantages and disadvantages of international agreements and model laws in achieving harmonization. While international treaties can provide a high level of harmonization, they may be slow to develop and require significant legislative changes. Model laws, on the other hand, are more flexible and easier to implement, making them a convenient approach to unifying online arbitration. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of integrating ADR/ODR processes into the traditional court system to expand access to justice. It references the Civil Courts Framework Review in the UK, which proposes the creation of a new online court with mandatory jurisdiction over claims up to £25,000. The article also discusses the role of key stakeholders, such as governments, businesses, and consumer organizations, in developing an ODR framework, highlighting their common interests and differences in views on ODR.