The article is devoted to the controversial issue of the relationship between arbitration and law, initiated at the time by the famous jurist F. Mann. The formulation of this problem seems paradoxical: either law creates arbitration, or arbitration creates law. One or another development of the discussion has important practical consequences, consisting in determining the direction of law enforcement and possible regulation. The author, based on the analysis of the theory of arbitration delocalization, aims to identify trends in the development of international arbitration and the role of arbitrators in this process. The delocalization theory taking root in international practice and in the practice of individual legal systems leads to the separation of arbitrators from national legal systems, which stimulates their almost unlimited discretion. In turn, this becomes a source of instability in law enforcement. An analysis of the relationship between international commercial arbitration and international investment arbitration provides grounds for concluding that investment arbitration arbitrators are more independent of national legal systems. As a result, in the absence of appropriate regulation, investment arbitration arbitrators are more inclined to create law, sometimes disregarding established approaches. At the same time, their discretion is limited only to self-censorship. This situation has led to a crisis in investment arbitration, the need for reform of which has been under discussion for a long time. The paper concludes that objectively the concept of delocalization reflects the trend of globalism of the world order and to a certain extent contributes to the destruction of the centuries-old Westphalian system on which the established international relations rest.