|
Background
History of Unfair
Representation in International Postings
Historically there have been
glaring disparities in gender representation among elected posts at the
international level. This has also been true of the ad hoc international
criminal tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda where the women
serving as judges have been very few in number.
Currently, there is only one woman out of 16
judges serving
at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and
three out of 16 at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Likewise, only one woman has ever served on 15-member
International Court of Justice which has existed for 80 years. There are no women serving at International
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea which is composed of 21 judges. Last
year, in a historic development two women were elected to the 35-member
International Law Commission for the first time in its 55-year history.
Despite their minimal
numbers, the women judges at the tribunals have played a vital role in
the development of international criminal law jurisprudence, especially
in cases of sexual and gender violence. The work of these tribunals has
yielded jurisprudence which recognizes rape and other sexual violence as
forms of genocide and torture.
The International Criminal Court will be a permanent judicial
institution independent of the UN system - unlike the Yugoslav and
Rwandan tribunals - and has mandates concerning the 'fair
representation' of women and men at all levels and legal expertise of
violence against women. Yet, there will still be the danger of
inadequate gender representation on the Court unless civil society plays
an active role in monitoring the process.
The UN system of voting has
long been criticized for the lack of transparency and the vote-trading
that accompanies the process. States Parties to the Rome Statute have
already taken a important step toward a fairer and more transparent
process in adopting rules and procedures with mechanisms to ensure
compliance with the treaty.
|
