Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-59lmv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-09-10T06:30:13.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Constitutionalizing Difference: A Case Study Analysis of Gender Provisions in Botswana and South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2010

Druscilla Scribner
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh
Priscilla A. Lambert
Affiliation:
Western Michigan University

Abstract

This article examines the use of gender in constitutions and its significance for gender equality. New democracies, and some older ones, are increasingly including gender provisions in their constitutions. What is the impact of these provisions on women's political and economic status? Does constitutionalizing gender serve to empower women? If so, what kinds of provisions have an empowering effect and under what conditions? To address these questions, we trace the political use (legislation, policy, and judicial interpretation) of gendered constitutional provisions in Botswana and South Africa, countries that differ substantially with respect to how they have “constitutionalized” gender. The case studies demonstrate how constitutional provisions provide a legal basis and legitimacy for women's rights advocacy and how they influence the content of legislation and judicial review of laws and policies.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable