Human Rights and the U.S. Gun Violence Crisis: A New Approach

November 20, 2018November 29, 2018 / Leila Nadya Sadat / Leave a comment

With the most recent mass shootings at Thousand Oaks Bar in California and the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Americans are once more reeling from the shock and horror of seeing their compatriots mowed down while undertaking normal daily activities. Innocent men, women, and children have been killed or injured whilst worshiping; enjoying a concert; spending an evening out with friends; attending school; or simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Each time shots ring out, the media is full of conversations about “gun rights” and the Second Amendment. But what about human rights? What about the right to life; the right of association; the right to health; the right to safety and security; the right to attend school and receive an education?

On November 2 and 3, more than 150 people attended a conference at the School of Law entitled, The U.S. Gun Violence Crisis: An Interdisciplinary and Human Rights Approach. Co-sponsored by the Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute at Washington University School of Law, the Washington University Institute of Public Health, The Public Interest Law & Policy Speakers Series, and the American Branch of the International Law Association (International Human Rights Committee), the event brought together leading scholars and experts in the fields of law, psychiatry, sociology, medicine, and public health policy to focus on new approaches to the U.S. gun violence epidemic.

Mike McLively, director of the Urban Gun Violence Initiative at Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, opened the conference by highlighting the scope and scale of the U.S. gun violence epidemic. He noted that more than 30,000 people die each from gun violence – violence that is, for the most part, easily prevented by simple and common sense regulation or even executive action. He noted that more than 60 percent of those killed by gun violence have committed suicide with a gun; deaths that were largely preventable through simple measures like waiting periods to purchase firearms. Others noted the disproportionate impact of gun violence on communities of color and young people, as well as the exportation of the U.S. gun violence crisis to third countries through the trafficking of weapons from the United States. The usefulness of international human rights regimes in reframing thinking about this issue, and the important work already being done on this issue by U.N. bodies was noted by several participants. Barbara Frey, in particular, has worked on this issue for many years at the U.N. in her capacity as the alternate U.S. member of the U.N. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and as Special Rapporteur to the Sub-Commission on the issue of preventing human rights abuses committed with small arms and light weapons.

Lee Epstein, Ethan A.H. Shepley Distinguished University Professor, spoke insightfully about the history of the relationship between the Second Amendment in the U.S. Supreme Court and the evolution of conversations around gun rights. Professor Epstein noted that the relatively recent emergence of an individual right to bear arms can be traced to a flurry of recent law review articles advocating for this position. She suggested that further social science research and legal research could therefore contribute to the solution of the current crisis.

Finally, Philip Alpers, founder of GunPolicy.org, concluded by offering a comparative analysis of the crisis and its resolution in Australia as a result of legislative action, gun buybacks, and a change in legal and popular culture with respect to guns and gun ownership.

During the second day of the conference, speakers met to discuss the conference, as well as a Report on the topic prepared by Harris Institute Fellow Madaline George and myself. The Harris Institute’s Report, which concludes that the U.S. government has failed in significant respects to adequately protect the human rights of individuals living in the United States from gun violence, will be published in the coming months. The papers from the conference will appear in a special symposium issue of the Washington University Journal of Law and Policy in 2019. The Institute has already presented testimony on the U.S. Gun Violence Crisis to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and is working on testimony before other human rights bodies as well.

To learn more about the Harris Institute’s Gun Violence Initiative, visit our website.

Beyond the Numbers: Gender Parity on the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights— A Lesson for African Regional Courts?

August 28, 2018August 28, 2018 / J. Jarpa Dawuni, Ph.D. / Leave a comment

ON August 27 2018, the newly elected judges on the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights were sworn in at the seat of the Court in Arusha, Tanzania. Earlier on, from June 25 to July 2, 2018, the 31st Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union (AU) took place in Nouakchott, the capital city of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. One of the agenda items during the session was the election of new judges to fill vacancies on the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR). Four spots had opened on the court—one of which was left open by Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa who resigned from the ACtHPR after her successful election to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in December 2017.

The three newly sworn in judges are; Judge Imani Aboud, the Judge-in-Charge at the Tanga High Court in Tanzania and current President of the Tanzania branch of the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ), elected from the East African region. Judge Stella Isibhakhomen Anukam, Director of the International and Comparative Law Department in the Federal Ministry of Justice in Abuja, Nigeria, representing the West African region, and Professor Blaise Tchikaya, a Professor of International Public Law at University of Paris, France, a native of Congo representing the Central region. The fourth seat was retained by Judge Ben Kioko of Kenya who was re-elected for a second six-year term.

This recent election is a historical one because it brings the gender composition of the court to six women and five men! The record of gender parity set by the ACtHPR begun with the elections in 2017, where in an earlier post Vive la Diversité!, I noted that in celebrating the gains made at the African Court in achieving gender parity, the Court’s gender parity success should provide lessons for other regional courts in Africa—especially the benches of the ECOWAS Court of Justice and the East African Court of Justice where women judges are woefully underrepresented.

From Tunis to Lusaka, women judges across the continent of Africa are making important strides in domestic judiciaries as shown in Gender and the Judiciary in Africa: From Obscurity to Parity? These developments do not rest only at the prescriptive level, as a growing number of women have broken the veil of masculinity and ascended to leadership positions as Chief Justices and Presidents of Constitutional Courts. From Arusha to The Hague, the increase in the number of women judges from Africa is being felt at the international level as documented in International Courts and the African Woman Judge: Unveiled Narratives. Currently, of the six women judges on the bench of the International Criminal Court (ICC), two are from Africa, accounting for 33% of all women on the bench— in a tie with the Latin America and Caribbean Group. At the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Justice Julia Sebutinde made history when she was elected to the ICJ bench in 2012, making her the first woman from the continent of Africa on the ICJ.

The representation of African women on the ACtHPR and the ICC strongly suggests that there is a pool of qualified women judges from the continent of Africa to fill positions on the benches of sub-regional, regional, and international courts. The record set by the ACtHPR, by achieving gender parity in its 12 years of existence is remarkable in the history of international courts and tribunals, where it took over forty years for the European Court of Justice to appoint its first woman judge, Fidelma Macken in 1999. The gender parity gains at the ACtHPR can be linked to a combination of regional factors and mechanisms. One such mechanism is the activist agenda to achieve gender equality embodied in the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa(Maputo Protocol) and the Solemn Declaration on Gender Equality in Africa, aimed at achieving gender equality across the continent. Second, the sustained advocacy for women’s equal participation in decision-making, led by women’s organizations such as Solidarity for African Women’s Rights (SOAWR). Additionally, the commitment of the Legal Affairs unit of the African Union in reviewing and rejecting nominations that do not contain the names of women, has proved instrumental in meeting the nomination requirements. Credit must also be given for the political will of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government to abide by the gender representation provisions in Article 12 (nominations) and Article 14 (elections) of the Protocol to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Court Protocol).

Beyond the numbers, what should the gender parity on the ACtHPR mean?

Attaining a critical mass of women judges on the ACtHPR is a great achievement, but more needs to be done. In the following discussion, I offer seven suggestions on how to move beyond the numbers.

First, is the need to develop specific strategies. The gender parity on the ACtHPR should provide lessons leading to the development of specific strategies for achieving gender parity on the benches of other African regional courts. This development should be used as an advocacy tool by women’s rights organizations to signal to other regional courts to nominate and elect qualified women judges to judicial positions. Not all sub-regional courts have gender aspirational targets in their protocols. Nonetheless, even where there are no aspirational targets, the success achieved by the ACtHPR should be framed and articulated as a regional diffusion mechanism for developing norms and best practices for judicial selection in other regional courts. The success at the ACtHPR should encourage other courts to revise their selection methods and bring them to par with evolving international standards for achieving gender balanced benches.

Second, is the need for advancing knowledge. Current scholarship needs to look beyond the descriptive representation of women on the ACtHPR. Feminist legal scholars should move past essentialist studies on the numbers of women judges and move towards analyses of questions on the substantive representation of judges. Research on substantive representation of African women judges has shown that women judges bring more than gender and racial diversity to the benches of international courts. Scholars need to focus on new research questions that interrogate wider judicial issues beyond why more women are needed and what they do on these courts. In this endeavour, scholars need to be mindful of avoiding essentialist repetitions of the “difference women judges make”, a caution succinctly captured by Judge Sebutinde when she notes;

In a world where one half of the population is female and the other half male, I would like for people to say one day that the World Court is comprised of fifty percent men and fifty percent women. That would be gender parity. It serves no purpose for people to ask, what difference or contribution have those three women judges made since they joined the Court? … For over seventy years there have been predominantly male judges serving on the International Court of Justice, yet nobody ever asks those kinds of questions when it comes to men. Why should the female judges serving on the Court have to justify or validate their presence or role on the Court? As long as we meet the statutory qualifications and are duly elected, we have as much right to sit on that Bench and to participate in the settlement of State disputes, without having to validate or justify our presence there with “value addition,” period.[1]

Third, is spreading the progress across sectors. The gender parity gains made at the ACtHPR and the long established gender parity on the African Union Commission, should be used as tools for promoting the African Union Agenda 2063, specifically goal 5, of achieving “an Africa whose development is people driven, relying on the potential offered by people, especially its womenand youth and caring for children.” Relying on the potential of women for development is not new to the African context. Women have always been at the center of economic development and have contributed in many ways to the domestic and international economic development projects. Yet, one of the many things lacking is the political will and commitment of governments and leaders to provide conducive political conditions and free and fair electoral processes aimed at encouraging and promoting women running for elected office. The remarkable progress made in increasing the gender representation on the ACtHPR should spread horizontally and vertically into other political, bureaucratic and administrative levels—beginning with the African Union organs and spreading across domestic government structures.

Fourth, is the mentoring impact. The increase in the number of women judges on both domestic and regional courts in Africa opens the door and encourages young girls and women to aspire for professional leadership. As the continent of Africa deals with its youth bulge, the success of women judges and other women in leadership positions should be used as learning and mentoring opportunities for the younger generation. In the words of Judge Florence Ndepele Mwachande Mumba;

The call for women judges must start at state level. National governments must be persuaded to open judiciaries to women judges and to promote their nomination to international courts. It is necessary to provide for gender balancing in international courts, at all times. Otherwise, women judges can easily be overlooked as the majority heads of state are still men. International legal practice offers women opportunities to excel and to contribute towards peace and harmony for all. Other women judges I worked with were of similar views. They felt that if women lawyers were promoted to high judicial office, gender balance would be attained. This would encourage girls to pursue law knowing that if they distinguished themselves, they can reach the highest offices in the legal profession.[2]

There is a lot to learn from the growing trend of women judges and their leadership capabilities. In May 2010, of the 18 judges on the ICC bench, 11 were women, the highest number the court had ever had. In 2015, the ICC made history with its all-female Presidency with the election of Judge Silvia Férnanda de Gurmendi as President, Judge Joyce Aluoch as First Vice-President and Judge Kuniko Ozaki from Japan as Second Vice President. At the ICC, four African women have served in the Vice Presidency; these include Judge Akua Kuenyehia of Ghana, Judge Fatoumata Dembele Diarra of Mali, Judge Sanji Monageng of Botswana and Judge Joyce Aluoch of Kenya. At the African Court, Judge Sophia Akuffo of Ghana and Judge Elsie Thompson of Nigeria have served as President and Vice President respectively.

Sixth, gains are not linear.The gender parity fluctuations at the ICC has shown that reaching gender parity on an international bench is not to be taken as a given, as these gains can be reversed at any time. Before the December 2017 elections of judges to the ICC, with the retirement of six judges, only one woman remained on the court. But for the election of five new women judges, the ICC would have regressed on its gender parity record. Sustainable gender balanced courts require continued vigilance to ensure that the progress made becomes institutionalized, eventually developing to the status of a customary principle or practice.

Seventh, is the need for sustained advocacy.Many challenges remain in achieving gender parity across other international institutions and courts. Gender activists must continue the drive to change the picture of international law through movements such as the GQUAL Campaign. Sustaining and replicating the progress at the ACtHPR provides lessons not only for African courts, but for all international courts, and advocates of gender parity can draw some best practices from the continent of Africa.

[1]Grossman, Nienke. (2018) Judge Julia Sebutinde: An Unbreakable Cloth. In, Dawuni, Josephine and Kuenyehia, Akua (ed.s), International Courts and the African Woman Judge: Unveiled Narratives (Routledge, 2018).

[2]Mumba, Florence N.M. (2018). Women Judges in International Courts and Tribunals –The Quest for Equal Opportunities.In, Dawuni, Josephine and Kuenyehia, Akua (eds), International Courts and the African Woman Judge: Unveiled Narratives (Routledge, 2018).

***This article is cross-posted from the Institute for African Women in Law.

CfP: Law, Translation, and Activism

July 6, 2018June 17, 2019 / Rebecca Ruth Gould / 2 Comments

1963_march_on_washington

The editor of the Routledge Handbook of Translation and Activism (Rebecca Ruth Gould), are seeking contributions relating to the intersections of law, translation, and activism. The full CfP is here. If you would be interested in contributing chapters dealing with any of the following themes (or other themes engaging with law and translation) please get in touch (preferably to globalliterarytheory@gmail.com):

the politics of court interpretation
indigenous language rights
migration law
law in multilingual societies
translating human rights
legal translation as a profession and technique

This volume will be published in 2019 as part of the Routledge Handbooks in Translation and Interpreting Studies. A preliminary website for the volume has been set up here.

440px-Gandhi_at_Darwen_with_women

Women challenge sexism in U.S. and Canadian guest worker programs through bold and innovative NAFTA labor petitions

June 17, 2018 / Tequila J. Brooks / Leave a comment

In July 2016, UFCW Canada and Centro de los Derechos del Migrante (CDM) filed petitions under NAFTA’s labor side agreement alleging sex discrimination in recruitment for the Canadian Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) and the U.S. H-2A and H-2B agricultural and low wage visa programs. In early 2018, CDM filed a supplement to its petition, arguing that sex discrimination is pervasive in recruitment for professional visa programs as well as low wage visa programs.

Because of sex discrimination in recruitment, less than 4 percent of the workers who participate in U.S. and Canadian agricultural and low wage guest worker programs are women. While working conditions in guest worker programs are rife with human and labor rights issues, they still represent economic opportunity for women who would like to participate. Moreover, women who are excluded are forced into migration through informal channels, leading to the risk of violence, human trafficking, and even worse working conditions.

These two bold and innovative petitions highlight in a tangible and human way the bifurcation of global migrant labor markets. Global migrant labor markets bifurcated based on gender exclude women from economic opportunity based on gender stereotyping. Discrimination in recruitment and treatment of women in the global migrant labor market is the norm, not the exception.

My forthcoming article in the Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal discusses and compares the facts and claims raised in each petition under applicable legal frameworks in Canada, the U.S., Mexico, and the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC). The article explores possible outcomes of the petitions given the nuances and political environments in the Canadian and U.S. cases and the current state of relations between the Government of Mexico and its North American neighbors. Finally, the article places sexism and gender stereotyping in North American guest worker programs in an international context, discussing other examples of sexism in the global labor market and existing norms in ILO Conventions and CEDAW Recommendation No. 26 on Women Migrant Workers.

In the Canadian case, the article argues that the Governments of Canada and Mexico should renegotiate international agreements that form the SAWP to implement the recommendations of the Mexican Council on the Prevention of Discrimination. In the U.S. case, the article argues that the Government of Mexico should pursue the establishment of an Evaluative Committee of Experts (ECE) under Article 23 of the NAALC if the U.S. does not enact and enforce meaningful reforms to eliminate sex discrimination in the H-2A and H-2B visa programs.

This article is the direct result of the supportive research community that has grown up around the IntLawGrrls blog. I first presented it as part of a wonderful panel at the IntLawGrrls 10th Birthday Conference in Athens, Georgia in March 2017. Moderated by Jaya Ramji-Nogales and featuring Karen Bravo, Deepa Das Acevedo, and Urvashi Jain, this panel focused on exclusion – whether the exclusion of transgender children from schools in India, of persons from their fundamental humanity through slavery and human trafficking, of women from the Hindu temple at Sabarimala, or of women from economic opportunities represented by international guest worker programs. I am grateful to my fellow panelists, to IntLawGrrls, and to the Dean Rusk International Law Center at the University of Georgia Law School for a transformative experience.

My article is dedicated in part to Olga Pedroza of Las Cruces, New Mexico, who unfortunately passed away earlier this year. Olga was my boss when I worked as a farmworker intern at Southern New Mexico Legal Services during law school. Olga introduced me to a world I never imagined, where migrant farm workers sleep on sidewalks in El Paso to catch 4:00 a.m. school buses to ride hours away to pick chiles, tomatoes, and onions in Southern New Mexico. It was because of Olga that I sat in a renovated chicken coop in Artesia, New Mexico, talking to a farmworker who told me that he and other farmworkers did not deserve any better. After her retirement from Southern New Mexico Legal Services, Olga served as a Law Cruces City Councilor for 8 years. Olga was a tireless and lifelong advocate for the excluded. She will be missed.

INVITATION TO BOOK LAUNCH

April 25, 2018April 25, 2018 / J. Jarpa Dawuni, Ph.D. / 1 Comment

BOOK LAUNCH

The African Foundation for International Law and the International Institute of Social Studies at Erasmus University, kindly invites you to the launch of ‘International Courts and the African Woman Judge: Unveiled Narratives’ and a Panel Discussion at the International Institute of Social Studies.

Date: May 7, 2018

Time: 18:00-20:00

Venue: Erasmus University, International Institute of Social Studies, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Event details and a flyer with link to registration can be found here: The Hague2018.

The event is free and open to the public. Reception to follow.

Applying the death penalty to drug dealers is never ‘appropriate’. It violates international law.

April 24, 2018 / Madalyn K. Wasilczuk / Leave a comment

On Wednesday, March 21, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo implementing President Trump’s plan to “get tough” on the opioid epidemic: the death penalty for drug dealers. Session’s memo “strongly encourage[s]” prosecutors to seek the death penalty in drug cases “when appropriate.” While this strategy comes as no surprise from a president who has lauded Philippine President Duterte’s approach to drug policy, it’s not “appropriate”. And it violates international law.

Lots of ink has been spilled arguing that Trump’s proposal will violate the Constitution, drive drug use underground, benefit large-scale drug dealers, and grind the federal judicial system to a halt. Less has been said about the international legal implications of the proposal.

Article 6(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the United States is a party, limits the application of capital punishment to the “most serious crimes.” The UN Human Rights Committee emphasizes that this category must be “read restrictively,” and the Economic and Social Council of the UN cautions that its “scope should not go beyond intentional crimes with lethal or extremely grave consequences.” Further clarifying the category, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions explained that the death penalty can only be imposed when “there was an intention to kill which resulted in the loss of life.”

According to Harm Reduction International (HRI), 33 of the 55 states that retain the death penalty apply it to drug-related offenses. These statistics, it might surprise you, already count the United States as one of those 33 countries. Though the United States has never executed anyone under the provision, 18 U.S.C. §3591(b) authorizes the death penalty for trafficking in large quantities of drugs and remains in force according to the Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide.

This might be less surprising when one realizes that the United States reserved the right “to impose capital punishment on any person [. . .] duly convicted under existing or future laws” when it joined the ICCPR. This reservation does not give the U.S. the right or ability, however, to opt out of existing customary international law. And that is precisely how international human rights lawyers and scholars increasingly view the abolition of the death penalty, particularly for drug-related offenses. Giving credence to this view, of the 33 countries that retain the death penalty for drug offenses, 17 of them have never executed anyone pursuant to those laws.

Continue reading →

BOOK LAUNCH ~~~ INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND THE AFRICAN WOMAN JUDGE: UNVEILED NARRATIVES (ROUTLEDGE, 2018)

April 10, 2018 / J. Jarpa Dawuni, Ph.D. / Leave a comment

The Institute for African Women in Law and the Wilson Center Women in Public Service Project jointly launched the book, International Courts and the African Woman Judge: Unveiled Narratives (Routledge, 2018) edited by Dr. Josephine Jarpa Dawuni and Hon. Judge Akua Kuenyehia (Former Judge of the International Criminal Court), with a foreword by Hon. Judge Gabrielle Kirk McDonald (Former Judge/President of the ICTY and Former Arbitrator, Iran-US Claims Tribunal).

Gwen Young, Director of the Wilson Center Women in Public Service Project introduced the panel.

Dr. Josephine Jarpa Dawuni opened the discussion, highlighting her motivations for editing this volume, noting among others the importance of drawing on the theories of postcolonial feminism, legal narratives and feminist institutionalism to analyze the place of women from the continent of Africa on international courts. She noted, “Why are we looking at African women judges? Why not the fact that she is a judge, she is qualified, she can do it. Legal Narratives help us understand their trajectory to the international bench.”

Prof. Nienke Grossman discussed the work of International Court of Justice Judge Julia Sebutinde (Chapter 3 below).

Prof. Rachel Ellett’s chapter focused on Judge Kellelo Mafoso-Guni of the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR) (Chapter 7 below).

Counsellor Christiana Tah, Former Minister of Justice, Republic of Liberia, provided remarks as a discussant. She noted;

“We [women] want to participate, we want to be a part of the process.”

“It’s important to uplift African women, but it’s not all about race, it’s about uplifting all women.”

“One of the things I always think about when discussing Africa and the judiciary is that you have to look at it as a dichotomy because of the history of colonization. How do you harmonize the two?

Other Chapters in the Book Include

Chapter 1: Introduction: Challenging Gender Universalism and Unveiling the Silenced Narratives of the African Woman Judge

By Josephine Jarpa Dawuni

This chapter provides the theoretical and conceptual framework around which the book is developed. By engaging in an overview and analysis of existing scholarship on gender and judging, it questions the gaps in existing theoretical perspectives and exposes questions on gender diversity which have not been addressed. It discusses the method and structure of the book.

Chapter 2: Women Judges in International Courts and Tribunals: The Quest for Equal Opportunities

By Judge Florence Ndepele Mwanchande Mumba

This chapter is a personal reflection on the life and journey of Justice Florence Ndepele Mwachande Mumba. The chapter traces her life growing up in Zambia, attaining a legal education and becoming the first woman High Court Judge in the Zambia. In 1997, Judge Mumba was elected to the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. She served as a Trial Judge for six years. She presided over, the Prosecutor vs Anto Furundzija, IT-95-17/1; the Prosecutor vs Kunarac et al, IT-96-23-T; the Prosecutor vs Simic et al. IT-95-9/T. Convictions in these cases included torture as a violation of laws or customs of war, outrages upon human dignity, rape as torture, enslavement, and crimes against humanity for persecution, cruel and inhumane treatment and beatings. These were among the first convictions for ICTY where rape and sexual violence were pronounced as crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture. Judge Mumba presided over two guilty pleas, The Prosecutor vs Drazen Erdemovic, IT-96-22 and the Prosecutor vs Milan Simic, IT-95-9/2. Judge Mumba’s view is that international crimes trials must be held in the territories where atrocities were committed for the benefit of indicted persons and the community. Statutory provisions for gender balance in international courts and tribunals are essential.

Chapter 3: Julia Sebutinde: An Unbreakable Cloth

By Nienke Grossman

This Chapter discusses the life story of International Court of Justice Judge Julia Sebutinde. It highlights her determination and strength of character, while raising questions about gender, geographical background, race, ethnicity and judging, and international judicial selection procedures. After detailing her biography before becoming an international judge, the Chapter turns to her selection to, experiences on and contributions to the Special Court for Sierra Leone, and subsequently, the International Court of Justice. The Chapter contains a section on her advice to future generations, an analysis of why her story is significant, and finally, it suggests avenues for further academic research.

Chapter 4: Akua Kuenyehia : Leaving a Mark Along the Journey for Human Rights

By Josephine Jarpa Dawuni

This chapter chronicles the life and journey of Justice Akua Kuenyehia, an academic, women’s rights activist and an international court judge. Using legal narratives as a tool for centering her experiences, the chapter presents monumental developments in her life as presented sometimes in her voice and situated within existing discourse on women, gender and feminist engagement with international law.

Chapter 5: Fatoumata Dembélé Diarra : Trajectory of a Malian Magistrate and Civil Society Advocate to the International Criminal Court

By Sara Dezalay

A high-level magistrate and prominent civil society advocate in Mali, Judge Fatou Dembélé Diarra featured among the historic first bench of judges elected to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2003. This chapter gives prominence to the voice of Diarra herself, as an exceptional individual with an acute degree of reflexivity over her own trajectory, the options she had and the professional strategies she pursued, and further, that of her own country’s post-colonial history. In so doing, however, it strives to reconstruct the structural conditions that can help explain her path, in what was still a French colony, in 1949, to the ICC. It underlines, meanwhile, how Diarra’s trajectory can prove a powerful entry-point to account for the position of legal elites in post-colonial Mali, and further, the role played by her appointment to the ICC, as a woman and as an African, in fostering the authority of the court over time.

Chapter 6: Judge Sophia Akuffo: Balancing the Equities

By Kuukuwa Andam and Sena Dei-Tutu

Justice Sophia was sworn in as the 13th Chief Justice of Ghana on June 19, 2017. Prior to this, Akuffo had served as the first female President of the African Court on Human and People’s Rights (ACtHPR) in 2012, as Vice-President of the ACtHPR in 2008 and as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Ghana since 1995. This chapter tracks Akuffo’s career from her birth in Akropong-Akuapem, in the Eastern Region of Ghana, to her appointment as the second female Chief Justice of Ghana. In particular, a selection of cases that Akuffo delivered judgments in will be analyzed as a means of contextualizing Akuffo’s legal philosophy. Additionally, this chapter will examine some of the challenges Akuffo faced as well as the lessons learnt during her legal career. In identifying the barriers that Akuffo encountered, this chapter considers the similarities between Akuffo’s experience and the experiences of thousands of female lawyers and judges working on the African continent; with a mind to highlighting avenues for increasing the participation of African women on International Courts. The chapter concludes with some observations and future research questions.

Chapter 7: Justina Kellelo Mafoso-Guni: The Gendering of Judicial Appointment Processes in African Courts

By Rachel Ellett

Representation of women in domestic and international courts is essential to the legitimacy of those institutions. Over the last decade low representation of women judges has begun to be addressed through reform of appointment processes. However, reforming formal appointment mechanisms does not eliminate the gendered informal structures of judicial appointments. Justice Mafoso-Guni’s biography – first woman to the Lesotho High Court and the African Court of Human and People’s Rights (ACtHPR) – illustrates the pervasiveness of informal gendered institutions as an obstacle to women reaching the bench; both in Lesotho and the ACtHPR. Utilizing diachronic analysis, this chapter reveals the arch of Mafoso-Guni’s career trajectory and pauses to offer more in-depth analysis on her appointment challenges in Lesotho and to the ACtHPR. Placing Mafoso-Guni’s appointment challenges in the broader context of increasing numbers of women to the bench more generally; her story highlights both the limitations and the gendering of individual agency in light of weak formal institutional commitments to gender parity. It further reveals the gendered power asymmetries present in the informal institutional mechanisms of both domestic and international judicial appointments. Judicial appointments perfectly illustrate the gendered institutional context in which women seek to carve a pathway to the bench.

Chapter 8: Elsie Nwanwuri Thompson: The Trajectory of a Noble Passion

By Rebecca Emiene Badejogbin

This chapter explores the trajectory of Judge Elsie Thompson from her background, to the Nigerian judiciary and onward as a Judge and eventually a Vice President of the African Court of Human and People’s Rights. It reveals the distinctiveness of her experiences and trail blazing paths, and is a demonstration of the impact of various factors such as socio-economic and political, as well as cultural location, education, contextual experiences, institutional opportunities and personal agency on the ascendancy of African women to transnational courts, and according to her, divine providence. The narration and analysis of these experiences engage a convergence of theories that touch on the impact of institutional arrangements on women, and the lingering effects of political, economic and cultural factors on women’s access to political appointments in a post-colonial context. While her experiences generally agree with literature on the subject of women’s ascendancy to these courts, this chapter closely interrogates her ascent as an African woman to a transnational court and states that not only does her presence in the court create judicial diversity, she has made ‘valuable contributions to jurisprudence and the development’ of regional laws.

Chapter 9: Conclusion: International Courts and the African Woman Judge– Unlocking Doors, Leaving a Legacy

By Josephine Jarpa Dawuni and Akua Kuenyehia

This chapter provides a recap of the goals of this project. It summarizes the key findings, amplifies questions yet to be explored and sets an agenda for the development of future research on women and judging in Africa. It also sets a plan for maintaining the momentum made with African women’s access to international courts and tribunals.

Copies of the book can be purchased on Amazon.com

For speaking engagements, email: info@africanwomeninlaw.com

Achieving Gender Parity in International Courts and Bodies: Does Diversity Matter?

February 3, 2018February 6, 2018 / J. Jarpa Dawuni, Ph.D. / Leave a comment

: Conference Attendees

From October 3 to 5 2017, women’s rights advocates, feminist scholars, Ambassadors, Heads of Government, policy practitioners and supporters of women’s rights convened in the beautiful city of Den Haag in the Netherlands. Viviana Krsticevic, Maria Noel and the entire team at the GQUAL Campaign organized this conference which had a twofold purpose; first, to celebrate the second-year anniversary of the GQUAL Campaign, and second, to bring together participants under a conference theme “Changing the picture of International Justice.” The highlights of the three-day event included an exciting plenary session with speakers like Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi, the current President ofthe International Criminal Court (ICC).

ICC President Judge Fernandéz de Gurmendi and Prof. Josephine Dawuni

Judge Fernandéz de Gurmendi, while acknowledging the gains made in achieving near gender parity on the ICC bench, cautioned participants and feminist advocates that such gains could easily be reversed. The ICC reached a high of eight women judges out of eighteen in 2003, which reduced to six out of eighteen by early 2017. With the ICC elections in December 2017, women took five of the six available seats. Out of the five women elected, two were from the continent of Africa, Judge Reini Alapini-Gansou of Benin and Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda.

Another highlight of the plenary session was the speech by the current Vice President of Costa Rica, Her Excellency Ana Helena Chacón. While reflecting on her experience in the parliament of Costa Rica and now in the office of the Vice President, Mrs. Chacón hinted at the fact that women have to work together to push women’s equality forward, noting further that “together we can and we should change the face of international quality; democracy is real if we leave no one behind.” Dr. Theresia Degener, Chairperson of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), gave moving remarks on the imbalance in the UN body, noting in particular the challenges she has had to face as the only woman in the Committee at one point during her tenure. She called for more efforts to nominate women. The rest of the conference was filled with insightful panels and workshops aimed at addressing central questions such as why equal participation of women matters, the international obligations of states in promoting gender equity on international courts and bodies, and strategies on how to achieve gender parity on these bodies. The conference concluded with the adoption of an Action Plan to achieve gender parity.

The overall goal and theme of the conference, was to acknowledge modest gains, while mapping a strategy for moving the campaign forward. The question that remains to be answered is how do we move this agenda forward? I provide a few strategies, which I believe are important for the overarching goal of changing the picture of international justice with the goal of achieving gender parity on international courts and bodies. In the first place, it is important to acknowledge, celebrate and develop a conscious effort to embrace all forms of intra-group diversity. To borrow from the acclaimed poet, Maya Angelou, “we all should know that diversity makes for a rich tapestry, and we must understand that all the threads of the tapestry are equal in value no matter what their color.” The global feminist movement has come under attack for tendencies to reproduce the very gendered and privileged hierarchies which it purports to fight in the first place. For Black feminist scholars such as Kimberlé Crenshaw, developing the concept of intersectionality provides a new prism through which feminist scholars can begin to question the multiple and intersecting layers different women face in their struggles against patriarchy and other forms of dominant discourse.

The call for acknowledging diversity has also come from what some call “Third World Feminists”. Scholars like Chandra Talpade Mohanty has criticized the western notions of womanhood and the incipient tendency at “othering” non-western women in her powerful piece “Under Western Eyes.” African feminist scholars such as Filomina Steady, Amina Mama, Oyeronke Oyewumi and Akosua Adomako Ampofo have increasingly called for a recognition of African notions of womanhood and the impact of imperialist and globalist layers of oppression in challenging the traditional notions of womanhood and women’s agency. Chicana feminist such as Gloria Anzaldúa, and feminist scholars from Asia such as Trinh Minh-ha, each remind us of the need for the global feminist movement to accept, celebrate and embrace a truly diverse global ethos of feminism.

So, how can the plethora of feminist voices be incorporated in the global agenda for more women on international courts in order to create an all-inclusive bench? The answer is simple; that in adopting strategies to increase gender parity on international bodies, these efforts should focus on adopting all-inclusive strategies that advocate for the “best woman candidate”, irrespective of national origin, geo-political affiliation, sexual orientation or other identity marker. This sounds like a simple suggestion; however, it requires that feminist scholars develop an understanding of the historical, social and political context from which different women come from. No doubt the domestic politics of judicial nominations will have to be examined as well. Ascribing personal agency to some women from particular regions of the world and not to others— which has tended to plague the global feminist movement, will need to be addressed in the global efforts demanding the nomination of more women. If indeed, feminist scholars and advocates are interested in achieving gender parity, it must be a gender parity that fully embraces intra-group diversity. The multilayered and intersecting identities women come with, will need to be fully recognized, acknowledged and accepted.

Another important strategy for the success of the GQUAL Campaign will be the cross-pollination of ideas and strategies. In other words, there is the need to learn from one another in terms of what has worked in some places and not so well in other places. Let me pause by noting that I am fully aware of the plethora of different variables at play here—the different legal traditions, the different political systems, the multiplicity of selection methods and the varying levels of political will to name just a few. Nonetheless, as I argued in my presentation at this conference, based solely on my research findings from the continent of Africa, women across the African continent have done relatively well, within a relatively short time period in not only accessing the judiciaries, but rising to the top as Chief Justices. At the international level, women from across the continent of Africa have made immense gains as international judges—both permanent courts and ad hoc tribunals.

Though the gains are not uniform across the continent—and that should come as no surprise for the second largest continent of 54 nation-states, yet certain patterns are evident. The success of African women as judges on international courts at the global and sub-regional levels in the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights are noted in a recently published edited by Josephine Dawuni and Akua Kuenyehia—- International Courts and the African Woman Judge (Routledge, 2018). Using legal narratives, this book presents the lived experiences of seven women judges from Africa. It challenges exiting notions of gender and judging, it elevates the voice of the woman judge and it leaves a legacy for the future through the voices and lives of these remarkable and accomplished women judges. Documenting the experiences of women who have blazed the trail in the international judiciary is important for raising awareness not only to stakeholders, but also to future generations that “yes, women can!” Documentation through theoretically grounded research and the development of context relevant epistemology, such as the matri-legal feminist theory I have argued elsewhere[1] is important for moving the gender equality agenda forward.

Other speakers at the conference spoke about developments that have taken place within the African context. Osai Ojigho highlighted the developments within the African Court which led to the current situation with the African Court being the most gender balanced international court as of this writing. In an earlier post, I highlighted the African court as a roadmap for achieving gender parity and encouraged other courts to follow suit. The African experience provides many lessons which the rest of the world can learn from. To think that in its eleven-year history of existence, it has achieved gender parity, a goal and aspiration which the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights are yet to attain. Sheila Keetharuth, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in Eritrea highlighted the developments that have taken place within the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights where women have made gains as Commissioners.

Lastly, it is necessary for the survival for a movement, or campaign like GQUAL, that scholars and policy makers engage in research as a tool and mechanism for awareness raising. Justice Mary Mamyassin Sey, a Justice of the Supreme Court of The Gambia and first woman judge in The Gambia discussed her experiences across multiple jurisdictions, spanning The Gambia, and as a Commonwealth judge in Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Liberia and Vanuatu. While discussing the challenges of working in different cultural contexts and often being the “first” and often “only woman”, Justice Sey noted that her call to duty, integrity and personal work ethics contributed to her success in these multiple arenas. Indeed, being at the intersection of multiple identities has come with its own costs, for instance with the threat on her life and threat of deportation for her decision in the Vanuatu Supreme Court that led to the conviction of 14 members of parliament.

The foregoing summary is my personal de-briefing from the wonderful conference in The Hague. Many strategies and action plans were adopted during the workshops held over two days. We look forward to more engaged, vibrant, diverse and theoretically relevant and practically plausible strategies that will be developed out of this conference. Many questions abound, such as the issue of setting aspirational targets as posited by Professor Nienke Grossman. For other practitioners such as Osai Ojigho who poignantly

(L-R )Josephine Dawuni, Nienke Grossman and Osai Ojigho at the foregrounds of the ICJ.

asserted “why walk when you can fly?”, quotas should be used as a necessary strategy to achieve gender parity, Ojigho further argued that “women should not be shamed into thinking that quotas or affirmative action lacks merit.” Gender equality matters not because it is a women’s issue, but because it is a human issue. Together, we can make gender equality on international courts and bodies a reality! Join the movement by signing the GQUAL Campaign Pledge!

[1] See, Dawuni, Josephine. (2018). Matri-legal Feminism: An African Feminist Response to International Law. In Ogg, Kate and Rimmer, Sue Harris (eds.). Feminist Approaches to International Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. (Forthcoming, 2018).

Nuevo libro para abogados hispano- y angloparlantes/New Book for Lawyers Who Speak Both Spanish and English

December 12, 2016December 10, 2016 / S.I. Strong, Katia Fach Gómez and Laura Carballo Piñeiro / Leave a comment

(English version follows)

Tres mujeres y profesoras de derecho: S.I. Strong de la Universidad de Missouri (Estados Unidos), Katia Fach Gómez de la Universidad de Zaragoza (España) y Laura Carballo Piñeiro de la Universidad de Santiago de Compostela (España) tenemos el honor de presentar el libro Derecho comparado para abogados anglo- e hispanoparlantes: Culturas jurídicas, términos jurídicos y prácticas jurídicas/ Comparative Law for Spanish-English Speaking Lawyers: Legal Cultures, Legal Terms and Legal Practices (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., 2016). Este trabajo supone una plasmación por escrito de algunas de las características más relevantes de nuestras carreras profesionales: trayectorias académicas y de práctica de la abogacía internacional desarrolladas en español e inglés, y en estrecho contacto con las comunidades jurídicas latinoamericana, europea y estadounidense. En consonancia con ello, la obra que hemos elaborado permite que abogados y estudiantes de derecho que hablan inglés y español adquieran fluidez jurídica en un segundo idioma. Realizar dicho esfuerzo es extremadamente importante no sólo para abogados especializados en derecho internacional, sino también para abogados dedicados al derecho nacional pero que tratan con clientes cuya lengua materna es un idioma extranjero.

La forma en que “Derecho comparado para abogados anglo- e hispanoparlantes” involucra a abogados y estudiantes de derecho en la práctica jurídica bilingüe es única por diversos motivos. En primer lugar, y dado que la mayoría de los abogados bilingües trabajan con otros abogados y con clientes que cuentan con unos orígenes legales y culturales muy variados, el libro no se limita a analizar unas jurisdicciones concretas. Por el contrario, el libro ofrece información sobre diversos países hispanoparlantes (fundamentalmente, España y México) y angloparlantes (fundamentalmente, Estados Unidos y Reino Unido). En segundo lugar, la monografía contextualiza la información, no sólo ubicando el nuevo vocabulario y los principios legales en el contexto lingüístico apropiado –el libro es completamente bilingüe-, sino también ofreciendo abundantes comparaciones con la legislación y la práctica de otras jurisdicciones. En tercer lugar, este tipo de análisis permite que los abogados y estudiantes de derecho aprecien las diferencias existentes en las culturas jurídicas, empresariales y sociales relevantes. Ello ayuda a los lectores a no incurrir en ofensas que puedan derivarse de problemas de comunicación involuntarios. El libro también explica por qué existen dichas diferencias y cuál es su fundamento en un contexto jurídico determinado.

Profundizar en la comprensión a través de barreras nacionales, sociales y culturales es un objetivo esencial de un mundo cada vez más pluralizado. Derecho comparado para abogados anglo- e hispanoparlantes es una herramienta muy útil para aquellos que trabajan cruzando fronteras lingüísticas. Como este libro de 700 páginas demuestra, no hay que temer a las diferencias, sino que hemos de alegrarnos de que la diversidad jurídica y lingüística exista.

***

unnamed Three law professors – S.I. Strong of the University of Missouri, Katia Fach Gómez of the University of Zaragoza and Laura Carballo Piñeiro of the University of Santiago de Compostela – have the honor of presenting their new book, Comparative Law for Spanish-English Speaking Lawyers: Legal Cultures, Legal Terms and Legal Practices / Derecho comparado para abogados anglo- e hispanoparlantes: Culturas jurídicas, términos jurídicos y prácticas jurídicas (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., 2016). This work reflects some of the characteristics that are most relevant to our professional careers as academics and practitioners working in both English and Spanish, and involving jurisdictions in Latin America, Europe and the United States. Consistent with that, the book that we have written helps lawyers and law students who speak Spanish and English become legally fluent in their second language. This effort is extremely important not only for specialists in international law, but also for domestic lawyers whose clients speak different languages.

Comparative Law for Spanish-English Speaking Lawyers: Legal Cultures, Legal Terms and Legal Practices / Derecho comparado para abogados anglo- e hispanoparlantes” introduces lawyers and law students to bilingual legal practice in several ways. First, the book does not focus solely on single jurisdictions, since most bilingual lawyers work with clients and co-counsel from a variety of legal and cultural backgrounds. Instead, the book offers information on several English-speaking nations (primarily the U.S. and the U.K.) and Spanish-speaking countries (primarily Spain, Mexico and Argentina). Second, the text seeks to contextualize the information, not only by placing the new vocabulary and legal principles in the appropriate linguistic setting (the book is entirely bilingual) but by providing extensive comparisons to the law and practice of other jurisdictions. Third, the discussion helps lawyers and law students appreciate differences in the relevant legal, business and social cultures, thereby helping them avoid giving offense through any inadvertent miscommunications, and explains why those differences arose and why they make sense in that particular legal environment.

Increasing understanding across national, social and cultural lines is an important goal in our increasingly pluralistic world, and Comparative Law for Spanish-English Speaking Lawyers provides a useful tool for those who work across linguistic lines. As this 700+ page text shows, legal and linguistic differences need not be feared but can instead be celebrated.

Write On! Read On! “Inter Gentes”: a new kind of international law journal

November 17, 2016 / Dr. Cassandra Steer / Leave a comment

Yesterday a buzzing social event at McGill Faculty of Law marked the launch of a new peer reviewed international law journal – but rather than adding to the existing plethora of academic journals, Inter Gentes is breaking the mold and doing something truly exciting and innovative. And they welcome your submissions in many different, multi-media forms.

The name Inter Gentes represents the ethos of this journal, to consider international law not according to the traditional 19th Century conception of law between States, but rather as law between people. This goes far beyond a “transnational” or “transboundary” approach, and is broader than “legal pluralism” or “cosmopolitanism”. The intention is to create debate and interaction on the way in which international law affects individuals and peoples, and the way in which we affect international law.

To facilitate this debate, Inter Gentes is an open access online journal, with no paper print issues. This reduces the overheads for the team producing the bi-annual publication, but more importantly ensures true international accessibility.

Inter Gentes will be publishing articles in English, French and Spanish, all of which will be peer-reviewed by members of the star-studded Advisory Board, including Bruno Simma; Francois Crepeau, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights of Migrants; Mark Drumbl; Lorie Graham; Sally Engel Merry; Jens Ohlin; Rene Provost; Juan Carlos Sainz Borgo and others. The expertise of the Advisory Board will guarantee the quality of the work published, but the real footwork will be undertaken by a dedicated team of students at McGill Faculty of Law, a faculty renowned for it’s commitment to linguistic and legal diversity, and which attracts students from all over the world.

As well as the peer-reviewed articles published in the bi-annual themed issues, Inter Gentes will have op-ed dialogues, encourage debate and dialogue among readers through interactive comments platforms, and provide multi-media content in the form of podcasts, images, posters and more. Since 2015 it has been creating ad-hoc content in the form of editorials, and it will continue this alongside it’s bi-annual issues.

inter-gentes-inaugural-cover

The inaugural edition has the theme “International Law and Peoples’ Resistance”, and it is testament to the commitment and ethos of this new journal that the articles included are written by authors from around the world, from perspectives as diverse as indigenous law and international law as colonialism; self determination as resistance; and global participation in global democracy.

The theme for next Spring is “(In)tangible Ownership in the International Sphere”, looking at diverse notions of property and land rights. The deadline for the Spring edition has now passed, however the editorial team is happy to receive op-ed pieces on topics related to this theme.

Keep an eye out for this exciting new platform, which really is an expression of twenty-first century perspectives, dialogues, multi-media forms of knowledge dissemination and learning, and diverse identities. And let the editorial team know if you have something you’d like to submit – they accept non-thematic articles on any area of international law year round on a rolling basis, which will be considered for ad-hoc publication, outside the publishing schedule for the theme issues