Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-10T11:06:16.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justifying Arguments About Selection Procedures for Judges at International Courts and Tribunals: A Response to Nienke Grossman

Part of: Nienke Grossman, “Achieving Sex-Representative International Court Benches”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Cecily Rose
Cecily Rose*
Affiliation:
Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies, Leiden Law School
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This contribution considers why states as well as international courts and tribunals should act to remedy the gender imbalance on international benches. In my view, the most appropriate question is not why they must, but why they should. Arguments that states are legally bound under the UN Charter to address this gender imbalance are weak, though human rights law does provide a basis for claims that states must take action. But arguments about legitimacy—both normative and sociological—could provide a more persuasive basis for arguing that states as well as courts and tribunals should act. In particular, the normative legitimacy of international courts and tribunals could benefit from selection procedures designed to help ensure that states nominate the most meritorious candidates for judgeships.

Type
Symposium on Nienke Grossman, “Achieving Sex-Representative International Court Benches”
Information
AJIL Unbound , Volume 110 , 2016 , pp. 86 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2016

References

1 Grossman, Nienke, Achieving Sex-Representative International Court Benches, 110 AJIL 82 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Id. at 86.

3 UN Charter art. 8.

4 Charlesworth, Hilary et al., Feminist Approaches to International Law, 85 AJIL 613, 622 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Id.

6 Id.

7 Grossman, supra note 1, at 87.

8 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women art. 8, Dec. 18, 1979, 1249 UNTS.

9 For further arguments about legitimacy, see Torbisco-Casals, Neus, Why Fighting Structural Inequalities Requires Institutionalizing Differ ence: A Response to Nienke Grossman, 110 AJIL Unbound 92 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Bodansky, Daniel, The Legitimacy of International Governance: A Coming Challenge for International Environmental Law?, 93 AJIL 596, 601 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 See Grossman, Nienke, The Normative Legitimacy of International Courts, 86 Temp. L. Rev. 61 (2013)Google Scholar; Grossman, Nienke, Sex on the Bench: Do Women Judges Matter to the Legitimacy of International Courts?, 12 Chi. J. Int’l L. 647 (2012)Google Scholar.

12 Grossman, supra note 1, at 89.

13 Id. at 88.

14 But see, e.g., Rhea, Harry M. & Meldrum, Ryan C., United States Public Support for the International Criminal Court: A Multivariate Analysis of Attitudes and Attributes, 37 U. PA. J. Int’l L. 739 (2015)Google Scholar; Voeten, Erik, Public Opinion and the Legitimacy of International Courts, 14 Theoretical Inquiries L. 411 (2013)Google Scholar.