Gender and Judging
11 – 12 June 2009
Coordinators: Ulrike Schultz (Germany), Gisela Shaw (United Kingdom) and Sally Kenney (USA)
Since women began serving on law courts, social scientists have been asking the question what, if any, difference that has made to the process and outcomes of judicial judging. Results of empirical studies vary. Most socio-legal scholars have been critical of a approach which takes a gender difference for granted. Discussion on the question however goes on. And there are many more questions to be asked about gender and judging.
Although the highest appellate courts of most jurisdictions now have at least one woman member, and in some countries such as Italy and France, women dominate lower judicial offices, the battle for a fully gender-integrated bench is far from won. The first woman judge was appointed to the European Court of Justice only in 1999, and so few women serve on international courts that the Campaign for Gender Justice lobbied heavily to have a gender quota written into the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court. The Lord Chancellor appointed the first woman to the House of Lords in England only in 2003, more than 25 years after women were appointed to the supreme courts of Canada and the United States. No woman has served on the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland. Scholars who look at gender and the legal profession, employment discrimination, and the sociology of work have much to contribute to the discussion as to why it matters whether women serve in high judicial office, as well as how current systems of judicial selection impede the appointment of women. With reference to the socio-cultural and broader contextual factors that affect gender and judging, social movement scholars can also learn from which campaigns have been most effective and why. These issues can inform consideration of the obstacles, challenges, and opportunities for other under-represented groups globally.
Those who study gender and judging have explored other important issues. Both Australian and Canadian scholars have documented the backlash against women judges. And theorists have been rethinking the concepts of neutrality, legitimacy, impartiality, and representation using a gender lens. Scholars in the U.S. have tracked the importance of gender bias taskforces for documenting discrimination and bias against women in law. Others are exploring how the media construct women professionals in general and women judges in particular.
Worldwide, polities seem to be transferring more and more power to courts, and not surprisingly, there has been a greater focus on who the judges are. Scholars from different countries, including the United States where judicial appointments and elections have become more contested, have much to gain from learning about other systems of judicial selection and appointment. As courts become more and more powerful, scholars and activists have seen the need to pay greater attention to each other’s strategies for accelerating the creation of diverse and representative judiciaries.
The Gender and Judging group, which started as an International Research Collaboration, has recently been granted the status of a Collaborative Research Network by the Law and Society Association (LSA). Already, this international network unites the scholarship of over 70 lawyers and sociologists from many countries of the world on issues relating to women in the legal profession, sex discrimination law, the sociology of gender and work, social movements, and feminist legal theory.
We build on the work of the Oñati Workshop on Women in the Legal Profession in 1999, which has resulted in the publication of the volume Women in the World’s Legal Professions (edited by Ulrike Schultz and Gisela Shaw, Oxford: Hart 2003). Initial sessions on Gender and Judging were held at the LSA conference in Baltimore in 2006, the socio-legal conference in Berlin in July 2007, the LSA and CLSA Conference in Montreal in May 2008, and the conference of the Research Committee on Sociology of Law (RCSL) in Milano in July 2008.
Ulrike Schultz and Gisela Shaw are currently editing a special issue of the International Journal of the Legal Profession on Gender and Judging.
We intend to publish the results and papers of the Oñati workshop in the Hart series in a volume comparable to that of 2003.
List of Participants:
Title: “Feminist Judges, Feminist Adjudication and Feminist Legal Scholars.”
Abstract: “Is there more than one theory about who is a feminist judge? Rosemary Hunter offers a compelling argument about the significance of self-identification as the marker of a feminist judge. However, several other scholars have focused primarily on feminist adjudication. Are these two approaches – to feminist judges and feminist judging – distinctive theories? Do they promote different purposes? Serve different audiences? Yield different conclusions about individual judges? What are the limits of each theory? Do they both facilitate comparisons among feminist judges? What is the goal of feminist legal scholars? Do we want to be scholarly critics? Or, do we want to encourage and support feminist judges and feminist judging?”
Keywords: 1) Feminism 2) Judges 3) Legal scholars
Maria Rita BARTOLOMEI
Title: “Gender and judging in traditional and modern society, Comparing two cases study”.
Abstract: “The paper proposes to draw on two different experiences amassed in the field. On the one hand, the research relates to the specific case of the survival of traditional procedures for the resolution of conflicts in Ivory Coast. Indeed, among the abron ethnic group, already in the past we can find women judges with their own courts of justice. On the other hand, I elaborated on a research work based on some periods of participant observation at law courts in the Marche region of Italy and in-depth interviews (40) given to women judge.
Through my work I will try and discuss how, according to Hanne Peterson’s theory about the so-called “home knitted law”, when we have female judges, we can easily find intuitive-unofficial legal practices, where values like bargaining, sympathy, sharing and solidarity are more and more widespread.
Special attention is devoted to the “horizontal discrimination”, that is, the gender specialization either in family, or juvenile or migration law and consequently the exclusion from big financial and political disputes and questions as well. Finally the work aims to show how through women access to judging, considerable changes take places both in scholarship and jurisprudence. In fact, gendered legal expertise greatly contributes to developing new jurisdictional patterns and models.”
Keywords: 1) Gender and judging 2) “Home knitted law” 3) “Horizontal discrimination”
Title: “Gender and judging in France.”
Abstract: “In France some researches have been realized on women in the “magistrature” (which includes judges and prosecutors) and on the history of the resistance to their entry in the magistrature. But we know little about the influence of gender on judging , topic which seems to be more developed in the common law countries. I will present what we know on gender and judging in France and analyze why it has not been such a popular research topic until now.”
Title: “The Impact of Women on the Administration of Justice in Syria and the Judicial Selection Process”
Abstract: “Available data show that qualification standards applied to women candidates in the judicial selection process in Syria seem to be higher than those applied to men. As a result, women are among the best-qualified members of the judiciary. In addition to being highly qualified, women are also known for their judicial integrity. Based on interviews conducted with 111 women judges and public prosecutors during the period 2004-2008, this article will examine the social, economic and political conditions that enable women in Syria to be more autonomous in their decision-making. Close attention will be paid to the career of the first woman appointed to the judiciary in Syria, Ghāda Murād (1975-2006), and the impact she had on the judicial appointments process as member of the High Judiciary Council.”
Keywords: 1) Women Judges 2) Judicial Independence 3) Judicial Reform
Title: Women Judges in the Netherlands (working title)
ARGENTINATitle: Gender Arguments and Gender Perspective in Legal Judgments in Argentina
This paper reviews the main arguments in relation to the need of a greater female presence in the judiciary, and the specific contributions that women judges would bring in relation to their gender. We try to answer the question of to what extent Argentine judges use gender arguments in their judgments, and if a gender perspective arises thereof.
We conclude that an increase in the number of women in judicial decision making positions, although it is important from the point of view of democratic legitimacy and from the symbolic point of view, it is insufficient to guarantee the incorporation of a gender perspective in the resolution of legal actions, since the problems of women in litigation may be favored or not with a right criterion, regardless of the judge’s gender.
Title: “Is there such a thing as a feminist adjudication process?”
Abstract: “Drawing on research conducted with Jane Wangmann about legal responses to systemic injuries, and in particular after reviewing aspects of the Grandview adjudication process that took place in Canada in the 1990s, we ask whether there is such a thing as a ‘feminist’ adjudication process.
After briefly outlining some of the history and key elements of the Grandview agreement, the paper will explore some of the following questions:
- · Has the feminist inquiry– often presented as “will women judges/decision makers make a difference” been misplaced; ie, are we failing to ask whether simply adding women, or indeed, feminists, to the existing legal structures can ever bring about any effective change? By the existing legal structures, we are referring here to the standard and long established processes of legal decision-making (and most particularly those involving validation, evidence, proof etc)
- · Is there a space for the introduction of feminist insights into decision-making processes before we develop or get to an adjudicative forum? Can a feminist approach help us to articulate harm in a more effective way? If we can do that, can we then design a more appropriate and perhaps ‘feminist’ method of responding to that harm?
- · What is the starting point of any consideration of feminist adjudication? Can lawyers design such a process or is it for the people whose claims are being adjudicated to do so?
What if anything distinguishes a ‘good’ process from a ‘feminist’ process? Are there particularly ‘feminist’ ways of hearing evidence, of evaluating it and responding to it?”
Keywords: 1) Judging 2) Adjudication 3) Feminism
Title: “Marcia Neave: Case Study of a Feminist Judge.”
Abstract: “Marcia Neave AO was appointed to the Court of Appeal in Victoria, Australia, in February 2006, following a distinguished career as a feminist academic and law reformer. In this paper I intend to explore her judgments during her first two years on the Court of Appeal, in light of my previous theoretical work on feminist judgments. Questions to be addressed will include: what is the scope for ‘feminist’ judgments on the Court of Appeal? To what extent and in what ways (if any) can the judgments of Neave JA be identified as ‘feminist’? In what ways (if any) do her judgments differ from those of other male and female judges on the court who do not identify as feminists? What overall contributions has Neave made to the jurisprudence of the Victorian Court of Appeal?”
Keywords: 1) Judging 2) Feminism 3) Victorian Court of Appeal
Title: “Women judges in Kenya: Challenges and Opportunities.”
Abstract: “This paper examines the situation of women judges in the superior courts of Kenya since the first woman judge was appointed in 1983, particularly their struggles for recognition in a male-dominated judiciary. The paper highlights the influence of women judges to the adjudication process in Kenya, in particular their contribution to the development of a jurisprudence of equality in relation to women’s human rights.”
Title: “Parallel and Combined Ladders: First Women Judges in Israel and pre-State Israel”.
Abstract: “From a numerical point of view, women are a majority in the Attorney General office, in the Ministry of Justice and in judging positions in Israel. The question is, when did women’s entry into these positions begin, what enabled it and what prevented or halted their integration? This is mostly an attempt to understand and decipher the process in which they climbed their way to the top of the judicial pyramid, and who stood behind it. I wish to show that the seeds of this success story lie in fact in the time of the British mandate of Palestine, at the end of the First World War. In fact, demonstrate the existence of two ladders – private and public – which women climbed in order to reach the top of the legal pyramid: at times in parallel, at others combined.
Keywords: 1) Women Judges 2) Legal History 3) Israel
Sally J. KENNEY
Title: “Which judicial selection systems generate the most women judges? Lessons from the United States”.
Abstract: “With 50 state judicial systems as well as a federal system, and some states using different selections systems for different levels of the judiciary, the United States provides an interesting laboratory for exploring to what extent the method of selection affects the number of women who serve as judges. Initially, many argued so-called merit selection which ostensibly reduced the negative effects of cronyism and political patronage would be less discriminatory against women, but the evidence has not supported that hypothesis. Moreover, systems may vary in their ability to generate one woman on the highest appellate court, for example, without producing the number of women judges proportionate to their representation in the qualified pool. The paper concludes by looking at the places where women have had some success to see what lessons might be transferable to other jurisdictions.”
Keywords: 1) Judicial selection 2) Women judges 3) State courts, USA
Title: “What´s in a Label? Argentine Judges Reluctance to call themselves feminists.”
Inspired by Hunter’s proposal, this paper attempts to give flesh to the feminist judge in the context of a group of high placed Argentine judges. Faced with their refusal to identify with the feminist label, I was obliged to find a common denominator for their orientation; it was their admitted tendency to work from a gender perspective and a commitment to equality between the sexes.
As I investigated the discourse of the judges in order to know the meanings the judges accorded to these expressions, I discovered a clear sympathy for feminist goals and methods.
In a second step, I attempted to understand their reluctance to identify with the feminist label in spite of their adherence to feminist goals and methods. Their testimonies exhibited a strong prejudice with respect to feminism and feminists. Their reluctance expressed in a refusal to be associated with a stigmatized label; fear to be identified with the most extreme forms of feminism; a misunderstanding of feminism and its tenets and a fear that the public might take them as partial. This calls for an intense and persevering dialogue between feminists and judges with a sympathy towards feminist goals.
and Juan LaLlave
Professional stress, discrimination and coping strategies: Toward an Integrative model of similarities and differences between male and female judges in Switzerland
One major problem in discussing gender similarities and differences between men and women judges is the degree to which we can arrive at valid conclusions.
If we maintain that gender differences are small and therefore do not have a significant effect on the nature of legal decision-making, we run the risk of minimizing a large difference, which may significantly affect legal decision-making.
If we maintain the differences are as significant as between “Mars” and “Venus”, we run the risk of amplifying minor differences, which may not have a significant effect. Both, similarity and difference models are likely to lead us to conclusions that are not valid.
hus, we maintain that only an interactive model can control against both types of errors. Although it is much more complex, an interactive model is more likely to lead to valid conclusions.
Judges that have completed law school have similar educational backgrounds. If their reasoning is based on their formal training and the understanding of the law, then case outcomes are likely to be similar. Angehrn & Ludewig confirm this similarity in a study assessing how women and men judges responded to similar moral dilemmas.
Ludewig & Weilehner compared women and men judges with regard to their experiences in their professional life. Women and men judges in Switzerland (n=248) reported similar difficulties in their professional life and similar strategies in coping with them. The results in this study fit the gender similarities hypothesis according to Hyde1
However, women judges reported more frequently using social support as a coping strategy and a more profound difference in the experience with gender discrimination: 50 % of female
Judges in Switzerland have experienced discrimination during their careers, whereas only 5
% of the male judges acknowledged such disadvantages. Their assessment of gender discrimination was particularly important because of the observed difference due to gender.
Overall, the conclusions from this comparative study among Swiss judges largely supported a gender similarities hypothesis. However the results also show an important difference in experience due to gender inequality. Clearly, the experience of discrimination appears to be a major difference. This can overshadow other major differences, such as women’s greater use of social support as a coping strategy.
Kathy MACK / Sharyn ROACH ANLEU (only Kathy Mack will be present)
Title: “Experiencing Judicial Work: Comparing Women Judges and Women Magistrates.”
Abstract: “Much discussion of gender and judging is based on considerations of difference between women and men, in particular, whether gender accounts for differences in decision making processes and outcomes. While we accept that identity impacts on judging, the difficulties of directly mapping differences onto one characteristic such as gender are apparent in the literature. It is this complexity that our research addresses.
We consider judging and gender by looking in greater depth at judges, particularly their experiences of and attitudes towards judging. Rather than investigate judging directly, we are examining the judges.
A comprehensive socio-legal study of the entire Australian judiciary finds some noteworthy constrasts between male and females in the judiciary, but also identifies similarities in many of the ways they experience their work. As this study, unlike many others, involves sufficient numbers of women at different levels of the court hierarchy, it is possible to compare women at different levels of the judicial hierarchy. We find women share some characteristics, views and attitudes across all levels of the judiciary which are different from those of their male colleagues. However, there are some aspects where women differ from each other, and are more like their male colleagues within their level of court. These findings challenge the binary construction of male/female differences within the judiciary and problematise attempts to map differences in judging processes and outcomes onto differences of gender.”
Title: “Diversity in the judiciary: The case for positive action”.
Gender Quotas for the Judiciary in England and Wales
Abstract: “For over twenty years there has been official support for the goal of increasing diversity in the judiciary in England and Wales. Yet the pace of change has been far slower than anticipated leading to a willingness to revisit some of the more fundamental tenets which have underpinned the approach to the problem to date, in particular the unquestioning and inflexible commitment to the principle of equal treatment as the foundation for all judicial diversity policies. This paper examines the different forms of positive action which might play a part in the development of new diversity strategies for the judiciary. It reviews the arguments for and against these alternative policies in terms of effectiveness, quality of appointments and equity”.
Keywords: 1) Judicial selection 2) Diversity 3) Positive action
Title: “Profiles in Leadership: Women Judges in the U.S.”
Abstract: “My contention is that certain eminent women judges, through their personal leadership, have influenced the development of law in ways that go beyond their decisional output. I will select a minimum of eight or ten federal court women using a variety of variables: special honors, positions in legal associations, publications, and opinion citiations. Their backgrounds will be examined for commonalities, and comparisons will be made across generations. I will use my subjects’ own words to describe themselves and their judicial philosophy. I hope to paint a picture, a kind of composite profile, of what a woman judicial leader looks like.”
Keywords: 1) Women judges 2) Leadership 3) American judges
Title: “Gender and Judging in Japan: toward theorizing a comparative perspective on Gender and Law.”
Abstract: “This paper is a preliminary report of our research project which addresses Continuing Legal Education on gender in 10 countries in terms of developing, providing, and organizing the educational program and system. It will address, first, why the project aims at comparing many countries from different legal traditions with different stages of development. Second, it will show, as a background of our effort, some factual data of the Japanese lawyers and gender, and judicial gender bias in the cases of employment discrimination against women, which resulted in the CEDAW specific recommendation to educate judiciary more about indirect discrimination in 2003. Finally, it will briefly explain the research results so far, and an emerging framework for a comparative socio-legal study on gender and law.”
Keywords: 1) Gender 2) CLE 3) Comparative study
Title: “Gender Training for Judges in the Philippines”
The paper is part of a research project entitled “International Comparative Research on the Process of Development, Implementation, and Institutionalization of Gender Curricula in Continuing Legal Education” that covers ten countries including the Philippines. The paper will supplements the papers of Kayo Minamino and Keiko Sawa. In the paper, background and factors of the introduction of gender responsive policy in the Philippine judidical system will be presented and some of the specific interventions and programmes to achieve the policy objectives will be explained.
Leslie James MORAN
Title: May it please the court’: forming sexualities as judicial virtues in judicial swearing in ceremonies
Abstract: This paper explores gender and sexuality of the judiciary by way of a case study of the texts of swearing in ceremonies of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. I first came across this data on the court’s website, where digital copies are published. Pre mid-1990 examples were found in the press files of the judiciary stored in the Court’s Law Library. The sample used in this paper is taken from years 1973 to 2009. The texts have much in common. They have a common purpose and structure. They record a ceremony dedicated to ‘welcoming’ the newly appointed judge that is made up of the swearing of oaths followed by speeches first by the Attorney General (or his appointee), followed by the President of the Law Society of New South Wales. The new judicial appointee then replies. The speeches are a form of ‘life writing’: of biography. The hagiographic style has the purpose of identifying and maping the professional and personal qualities of the subject onto the newly made judicial subject. They formulate and fashion the subject as the embodiment of judicial virtues. The objective of this paper is through the lens of queer theory, to offer a reading of these texts exploring the formation of sexuality and gender as judicial virtues.
Mary Jane MOSSMAN
Title: “Ontario’s ‘First Three’ Women Judges: Gender, Feminism and Judicial Appointment.”
Abstract: “This paper explores issues about gender and about feminism in relation to the appointment of the ‘first three’ women judges to different levels of courts in Ontario. In doing so, the paper tries to explore how gender was a barrier to judicial appointment in the mid-twentieth century, and then became a ‘bonus’ in the context of the second wave feminist movement in the 1970s and later on. Yet, even in this later context, women who wished to be considered for judicial appointment frequently denied, or at least downplayed, their sense of connection to feminism and to the women’s movement. The paper argues that these responses need to be examined carefully in terms of how they evidence the strength of ideas about ‘professionalism’ in 1aw, and how they also reveal the strategies of individual women in negotiating between ideas about gender and about professionalism in law. In doing so, the paper tries to ‘open up’ the issues about gender and judging to see the myriad and nuanced ways in which gender might operate sometimes as ‘barrier’ and sometimes as ‘bonus’.”
The paper examines the experiences of Judge Helen Kinnear, the first woman appointed to a superior court in the British Commonwealth when she becamne a judge of Ontario’s County Court in 1943; and tries to explain both the reasons for her appointment in the midst of World War II and also the long period between her appointment and that of Justice Mabel Van Camp to the Ontario High Court in 1971. Van Camp herself credited the feminist movement, at least in part, as the explanation for her appointment, by contrast with Justice Bertha Wilson, appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1975, who remained throughout her life ‘avowedly not a feminist’ (in the words of her biographer). Indeed, Wilson was a virtual unknown at the time of her appointment to the appellate court in Ontario, even though she then became a much-loved and admired woman judge and a formidable champion of gender reform in the legal profession after her retirement from the bench. As is evident, these are complicated women and their lives as the ‘first three’ women appointed to different levels of the Ontario judiciary thus offer excellent case studies of relationships between ideas about gender, feminism and legal professionalism in relation to women’s appointment to the judiciary.”
Keywords: 1) Gender 2) Legal Professionalism 3) Women Judges
Title: “Rethinking Judicial Diversity”
Abstract: In October 2008, the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) announced record numbers of women judges sitting in the High Court in the UK. And yet, at the same time the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Sex and Power 2008 report suggests that women’s progression into the upper echelons of the judiciary in the UK is actually slowing down. Either way, despite significant political and judicial recognition of the importance of, and commitment to, ensuring a judiciary which better reflects the society it serves judicial diversity in the UK remains some way off.
Taking the UK Government’s definition of diversity as its starting point, the paper argues for a rethinking of what we mean by, and understand as, ‘diversity’ in the context of the judiciary. To this end, it outlines two distinct, yet related, concepts typically understood as ‘diversity’ – inclusive diversity and transformative diversity – which work together to ensure a more varied bench. While inclusive diversity has the more familiar aim – to simply increase the number of women and those with a black and minority ethnic backgrounds on the bench – it is argued that progress toward this will be a harder and slower journey (as we are seeing) without the acceptance of transformative diversity.
Keywords: 1) Merit 2) Diversity 3) Judiciary
Title: “Did Female Judges Judge Differently? Female Judges in Weimar” Germany
Abstract: While most of the historical research concerning the access of women to the legal professions focuses on the struggles to access the professions, the working situation of female lawyers after the successful access is seldom a topic of research. The same holds true for the work done on the access to different legal professions, although without mentioning or realizing it all are based on the history of the female attorneys. Thus this essay for the first time deals with the history of a so far historically neglected profession: the female judges in Germany until 1933. It will explore who have been the “first”, which working conditions they found when entering the jurisprudence and which experiences and impressions they gained. Finally it will examine whether the first female judges brought on a change in the judicature.
Title: “Gender and International Support for the Legal System of Cambodia.”
Abstract: “In Cambodia these years by the strong supports of many countries and international bodies, not only civil law, criminal law, and other important laws have been enacted newly, but also the system of formation of jurists have been going through a drastic change. In this presentation efforts will be made to integrate gender perspectives fragmented in these new laws and legal system newly born in order to examine ‘gender and law’ introduced by the international interventions.”
Keywords: 1) Gender and law 2) Legal system 3) International support
Ulrike SCHULTZ Co-Editor
Title: “Women Judges Careers in Germany”
Results of empirical research into Women Judges Careers in the federal state of Northrhine-Westfalia, the biggest one in Germany with 18 Mill. inhabitants and 5.854 judges of who 33% are women.
We have analyzed the existing statistical data, evaluated personnel files and interviewed persons who hold key positions for advancing careers and a number of judges (male and female equally) who have climbed up the ladder or who haven´t got a chance for a career or foregone it. So far we have got an overwhelmingly positive picture, clouded by only some opaque dots.
Gisela SHAW Co-Editor
Title: “Theoretical Reflections on Diversity and Difference in the Judiciary”
Title: “Quota for women on the bench: an idea whose time has come”
Hilary Ann SOMMERLAD
Title: “Let History judge? Gender, race, class and performative identity.”
Abstract: “The continual process of producing identities can be understood as a struggle around authorisation and recognition (Fraser, 1995). This is exemplified by Fanon’s observations that ‘it is not I who make meaning for myself, but it is the meaning that was already there, pre-existing, waiting for me.. ..I came into the world with the will to find meaning but then found that I was an object. Sealed into that crushing objecthood’ (1967, 134; 109). The refusal of recognition / denial of subjecthood and the projection of (negative) meaning is one of the primary processes through which social divisions of class, gender and race are established/ reproduced, delimiting the possibilities for performative identity, whilst simultaneously attributing subjecthood and value to the judgement maker, confirming his power to ‘recognise’ or refuse identity claims.
The law provides one of the most powerful mechanisms for making these meanings, for setting the limits of performative identities. Given this, how do judges drawn from subordinated categories imagine themselves? How do they establish their authority and move from object to meaning maker? How do they negotiate the struggle between the different identities they occupy and how do they resist their interpellation as ‘women’ rather than as judges? How do they evade or negotiate their complicity in the discursive mechanisms which reproduce the historicised subjectivities of, for instance, black women. How do they negotiate the collegiality they must show as part of their bid for recognition and maintain a sense of racial or gender integrity? These questions are particularly acute as a result of the law’s engagement in England and Wales in a number of moral panics: for instance about, femininity/ the drunken, fat female ‘chav’; Islamic women, and Islamic terrorism.
This paper therefore considers these questions in the light of interviews with three judges in England and Wales: a white woman of working class origins, a Pakistani British woman and an African Caribbean woman.”
Keywords: 1) Women Judges 2) Identity 3) Authorisation & Recognition
Title: Judges and Intersectionality in India
The paper traces the career development of a cohort of judges in India who were the focus for a major collaborative Indo British project on gender and law training in the 1990s. This group of 43 District and Sessions judges (30 men; 13 women), drawn from all over India were selected by their respective High Courts. Subsequently a significant number have been elevated to their High Courts (the final appellate body in each state). The paper considers the institutional contexts in which the judges operate and the tensions between merit and hierarchy. It assesses the impact of sex, religion, class/caste and family on career development in this institutional context. The paper is set within a discussion of the wider developments within India on judicial education and its contribution to the implementation of social development measures including the implementation of the legislation relating to domestic violence.