The often-neglected element which has contributed to the success of international arbitration is the idea of fairness that parties associate with it. The New York Convention prohibits the enforcement of awards on the ground of violation of fairness or due process. However, excessive reliance on this ground has led to “due-process paranoia”. Through this article, a rare attempt is made to analyse this phenomenon at the stage when the arbitral process is in action, rather than looking at judicial attitudes during the award-enforcement stage vis-à-vis a tribunal’s decisions. The premises underlying the paranoia shall be dissected, only to find that they are unwarranted. The article shall study the arbitrators’ decision-making process—to uncover a common fallacy known as the “hindsight bias”. The scrutiny of these concepts is ultimately aimed at banishing the paranoia for arbitrators to function effectively.