Beyond Geography and Gender: Representation at the International Bench for Adjudication and Law-making

To assess claims for more representative international courts, we should consider the reasons for more equitable representation of gender, geography, legal traditions and specialties, and beyond.
1. Both adjudication and judicial law-making have implications.
2. Reasons include epistemic competence and empathy, expression of status equality, and integrity, though not ‘democratization’.
3. These reasons support representation for other considerations and perspectives beyond gender, such as TWAIL, often intersecting, depending on issue areas. Actual representations may not be necessary to ensure presentation of legal arguments, which is good news to secure the interest of future generations.
4. We should learn from relative success stories: the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. Transparent and more formalized procedures help: the pipeline prior to election, and mechanisms of accountability for judicial law-making and judgments.