Content uploaded by Antónia Barradas
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Antónia Barradas on Oct 12, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
The report I wrote presents Gender Equality Perspectives in the Brazilian Justice System and in European countries
Abstract and Figures
Study presents Gender Equality Perspectives in the Brazilian Justice System and in European countries
Figures - uploaded by Antónia Barradas
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Antónia Barradas
Content may be subject to copyright.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
This article addresses a key question in debates around judicial diversity: what evidence is there that a more diverse judiciary
will make a difference to substantive decision-making? The article begins by outlining the range of arguments for a more diverse
judiciary which include, but are not confined to, making a difference to substantive decision-making. It then turns to consider
the considerable evidence which now exists both to refute and to support the existence of substantive differences in decision-making
following the appointment to the judiciary of women and others from non-traditional backgrounds. On the basis of this evidence,
it draws conclusions as to the kinds of differences in decision-making which might be expected, and the circumstances under
which different approaches to decision-making are likely to flourish.
The problem of gender equality among lawyers has been a subject of significant research, study and action across the globe. It is well known that despite women's entrance into law school in relatively equal numbers to men over the past few decades, they remain significantly under-represented in positions of leadership and power across sectors of the legal profession. Progress has come to a standstill, making this a particularly critical time to examine the ways we conceptualise the problem and rethink the solutions. The legal profession, as a gatekeeper of equality and as an institution committed to the preservation of rights, should be emblematic of gender equality. Responsibility for addressing the problematic gender dynamics is something that lies with the entire profession and should be framed as a matter of ethics. To date, the conversation on this issue has been relatively insular and this essay argues for an expansion of this conversation to include the entire bar. Toward this end, this essay suggests that there are new ways to think about pathways to gender equality by expanding the boundaries that have defined the problem. First, it has been defined in a way that focuses almost exclusively on those already engaged in the practice of law, often at the highest echelons of (private) practice to the exclusion of other sectors, especially legal education. Second, the existing movement has almost unilaterally focused on the structural impediments within the legal system or the characteristics of law practice itself that exist as roadblocks to women, ignoring significant barriers that are not necessarily unique to women lawyers but impede the progress of women generally. The movement also often fails to extend beyond geographic borders of a particular country, thereby eliminating the potential for a global conversation. In crafting solutions, there has been little acknowledgement of the role of legal education.
Twenty-five years ago, in this Journal , Hilary Charlesworth, Christine Chinkin, and Shelley Wright argued that the structures of international law “privilege men.” As shown in Table 1, which summarizes data from a forthcoming article, on nine of twelve international courts of varied size, subject-matter jurisdiction, and global and regional membership, women made up 20 percent or less of the bench in mid 2015. On many of these courts, the percentage of women on the bench has stayed constant, vacillated, or even declined over time. Women made up a lower percentage of the bench in mid 2015 than in previous years on two-thirds of the courts surveyed.
Introduction: Gender and Judging: Overview and Synthesis Ulrike Schultz and Gisela Shaw PART 1: PIONEERS AND EMINENT WOMEN JUDGES 1.1. Becoming the First Women Judges in Ontario: Women Lawyers, Gender and the Politics of Judicial Appointment Mary Jane Mossman 1.2. Profiles in Leadership: Eminent Women Judges in the United States Elaine Martin 1.3. The Entry and Integration of Women into Judicial Positions in Israel Eyal Katvan 1.4. First Female Judges in the Weimar Republic in Germany: Reflections on Difference Marion Rowekamp PART 2: WOMEN JUDGES' WORK AND CAREERS 2.1. Feminisation of the French 'Magistrature': Gender and Judging in a Feminised Context Anne Boigeol 2.2. 'I was noticed and I was asked ...' Women's Careers in the Judiciary. Results of an empirical study for the Ministry of Justice in Northrhine-Westfalia, Germany Ulrike Schultz 2.3. Women Judges and Magistrates in Kenya: Challenges, Opportunities and Contributions Winifred Kamau 2.4. The Impact of Women on the Administration of Justice in Syria and the Judicial Selection Process Monique C Cardinal 2.5. Skills for Judicial Work: Comparing Women Judges and Women Magistrates Kathy Mack and Sharyn Roach Anleu 2.6. Professional Stress, Discrimination and Coping Strategies: Similarities and Differences between Female and Male Judges in Switzerland Revital Ludewig and Juan LaLlave PART 3: GENDER PERSPECTIVES IN JUDGING 3.1. Gendered Experiences of a Judge in Germany Ruth Herz 3.2. Women Judges in the Netherlands Bregje Dijksterhuis 3.3. Gender and Judging in Traditional and Modern Societies: A Comparison of Two Case Studies (Ivory Coast and Italy) Maria Rita Bartolomei 3.4. Gender Arguments and Gender Perspective in Legal Judgments in Argentina Andrea L Gastron, M Angela Amante and Ruben Rodriguez 3.5. Do Women on South Africa's Courts Make a Difference? Ruth B Cowan PART 4: GENDERED CONSTRUCTION OF JUDGES 4.1. 'May it Please the Court'. Forming Sexualities as Judicial Virtues in Judicial Swearing-in Ceremonies Leslie J Moran 4.2. Let History Judge? Gender, Race, Class and Performative Identity: A Study of Women Judges in England and Wales Hilary Sommerlad PART 5: FEMINIST JUDGES AND FEMINIST ADJUDICATION 5.1. Must Feminist Judges Self-identify as Feminists? Beverley Baines 5.2. Justice Marcia Neave: Case Study of a Feminist Judge Rosemary Hunter 5.3. What's in a Label? Argentine Judges' Reluctance to Call Themselves Feminists Beatriz Kohen 5.4. A Feminist Adjudication Process: Is There Such a Thing? Reg Graycar PART 6: QUOTAS AND DIVERSITY 6.1. Which Judicial Selection Systems Generate the most Women Judges? Lessons from the United States Sally J Kenney 6.2. Gender Quotas for the Judiciary in England and Wales Kate Malleson 6.3. Rethinking Judicial Diversity Erika Rackley PART 7: GENDER AND JUDICIAL EDUCATION 7.1. Gender and Judicial Education in India Ann Stewart 7.2. Gender and Judicial Education in Japan Kayo Minamino 7.3. Engendering the Judiciary-Lessons from the Philippines Atsuko Miwa 7.4. Gender Training for the Judiciary in Cambodia Keiko Sawa 7.5. Do German Judges Need Gender Education? Ulrike Schultz
In this article, we develop and empirically test the theoretical argument that when an organizational culture promotes meritocracy (compared with when it does not), managers in that organization may ironically show greater bias in favor of men over equally performing women in translating employee performance evaluations into rewards and other key career outcomes; we call this the “paradox of meritocracy.” To assess this effect, we conducted three experiments with a total of 445 participants with managerial experience who were asked to make bonus, promotion, and termination recommendations for several employee profiles. We manipulated both the gender of the employees being evaluated and whether the company's core values emphasized meritocracy in evaluations and compensation. The main finding is consistent across the three studies: when an organization is explicitly presented as meritocratic, individuals in managerial positions favor a male employee over an equally qualified female employee by awarding him a larger monetary reward. This finding demonstrates that the pursuit of meritocracy at the workplace may be more difficult than it first appears and that there may be unrecognized risks behind certain organizational efforts used to reward merit. We discuss possible underlying mechanisms leading to the paradox of meritocracy effect as well as the scope conditions under which we expect the effect to occur.
The case for gender equality on the bench wouldseem too uncontroversial to requirejustification. Yet the practical realities ofthe slow progress of women towards equality ofparticipation both quantitative and qualitativein the judiciary testifies to the continuingneed to argue the case for change. To date, theprimary rationale for promoting gender equalityhas been that women will bring a uniquecontribution to the bench as a result of theirdifferent life experiences, values andattitudes. Such arguments derived fromdifference theory have had a strong appealsince they appear to give legitimacy to theundervalued attributes traditionally associatedas feminine while also promoting the meritprinciple by claiming to improve the quality ofjustice. However, this article argues thatdifference theory arguments are theoreticallyweak, empirically questionable andstrategically dangerous. Instead, it argues forthe adoption of a rationale for gender equalitybased on equity and legitimacy; that equalparticipation of men and women in the justicesystem is an inherent and essential feature ofa democracy without which the judiciary willlose public confidence. This approach, thoughless immediately appealing, is ultimately moresound.
Women occupy only 39% of positions of power in the Public Prosecution Service
"Women occupy only 39% of positions of power in the Public Prosecution Service", available at: https://www.conjur.com.br/2018-jun-24/mulheres-ocupam-apenas-39-cargos-poder-ministerio-publico (consulted 15.02.2019). See also study entitled "Gender Scenarios-Reflection, Research and Reality", of the National Council of Prosecution Services, 2018, pg. 5, available at:
http://www.cnmp.mp.br/portal/images/20180625_CENARIOS_DE_GENERO_v.FINAL_3.1_1.pdf (consulted 15.02.2019).
See also "In ranking of 190 countries about the presence of women in Parliaments, Brazil occupies position 152
"Gender Scenarios-Reflection, Research and Reality", of the National Council of Prosecution Services, 2018, pg. 5, available at:
http://www.cnmp.mp.br/portal/images/20180625_CENARIOS_DE_GENERO_v.FINAL_3.1_1.pdf (consulted 15.02.2019). See also "In
ranking of 190 countries about the presence of women in Parliaments, Brazil occupies position 152", available at:
https://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/em-ranking-de-190-paises-sobre-presenca-feminina-em-parlamentos-brasil-ocupa-a-152-posicao.ghtml(consulted 15.04.2019). See also: "Nadine Gasman, UN Women representative in Brazil, will be the new Minister of Women
in Mexico", available at https://agenciapatriciagalvao.org.br/tag/onu-mulheres/?print=pdf-search (consulted 14.05.2019); "The
conquests of Brazilian women are irreversible", available at: https://www.metropoles.com/brasil/direitos-humanos-br/nadine-gasmanconquistas-das-mulheres-brasileiras-sao-irreversiveis (consulted 10.03.2019) and "Women occupy only 39% of positions of power in the
Public Prosecution Service", available at: https://www.conjur.com.br/2018-jun-24/mulheres-ocupam-apenas-39-cargos-poderministerio-publico (consulted 15.02.2019).