Gender Representation on the Tribunals of the United Nations Internal Justice System: A Response to Nienke Grossman

Memooda Ebrahim-Carstens

doi:10.1017/s2398772300002889

Abstract

Shylock: Most learned judge, a sentence! Come prepare! Portia: This bond doth give thee here no jot of blood; The words expressly are “a pound of flesh.” (The Merchant of Venice, Act 4, Scene1) In her interesting study on “Achieving Sex Representative International Court Benches,” Nienke Grossman observes that international judgeships are often based on personal networks and social currency, or used to reward political loyalty or to advance political agendas, rather than to select the most qualified candidates. She illustrates how nomination procedures for international benches generally lack transparency, and horse-trading infects elections to the international courts. To ensure gender equity, Grossman advocates that states should take remedial steps to make nomination and selection procedures more open, transparent, and merit-based, at both the national and the international level.

Highlights

In her interesting study on “Achieving Sex Representative International Court Benches,” Nienke Grossman[1] observes that international judgeships are often based on personal networks and social currency, or used to reward political loyalty or to advance political agendas, rather than to select the most qualified candidates
The UN system of administration of justice offers a success story of how gender representation can be achieved in international tribunals
Starting operations in 2009, and comprised of a first instance United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT) and an appellate United Nations Appeals Tribunal (UNAT), this judicial system has made remarkable strides in the representation of women on the bench, and right from the beginning set a trend that contrasts with the declining number of women on other international court benches.[2]

Summary

Introduction

In her interesting study on “Achieving Sex Representative International Court Benches,” Nienke Grossman[1] observes that international judgeships are often based on personal networks and social currency, or used to reward political loyalty or to advance political agendas, rather than to select the most qualified candidates. Grossman advocates that states should take remedial steps to make nomination and selection procedures more open, transparent, and merit-based, at both the national and the international level.

Results

Conclusion