Article
Sep 27
Back

SURGE OF ‘FEMINISATION’ IN THE SERBIAN JUDICIARY

Nenad S. TEŠIĆ

10.51204/Anali_PFBU_25305A
ABSTRACT /

In this paper, the author examines the extent to which the actual gender ratio in the Serbian judiciary is a consequence of deep-rooted stereotypes about the roles that women and men should play in the family and society. This dilemma is considered through multiple perspectives, including by analysing statistical data on gender distribution and the parity of men and women in leadership positions. Finally, the author compares gender structure in the Serbian judiciary with corresponding data from a representative sample of European judicial systems. Taking into account that in a number of countries the proportion of women in the Supreme Court is significantly higher (feminisation of the judiciary), while in others this percentage is lower (‘masculinisation’ of the judiciary), the author aims to determine the position of the Serbia in this context, highlighting that the Serbian judiciary is well ahead in terms of ‘feminisation’ compared to EU member states.

DOWNLOAD COMPLETE ARTICLE /
English  
REFERENCES /
  1. Babović, Marija, Marijana Petrović. 2021. Gender Equality Index for the Republic of Serbia 2021 – Digitalization, future of work and gender equality. Belgrade: Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction Unit of the Government of the Republic of Serbia. https://socijalnoukljucivanje.gov.rs/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Gender_Equality_Index_for_the_Republic_of_Serbia_2021.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  2. Baxter, Judith. 2013. How to beat the female leadership stereotypes. The Guardian, 9 December, https://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/dec/09/beat-female-leadership-stereotypes, last visited April 4, 2025.
  3. Bessière, Céline, Sibylle Gollac, Muriel Mille. 2/2016. The feminization of the judiciary: What is the problem? Trans. Julia Cooper. Travail, genre et sociétés 36: 175–180.
  4. Council of Europe. 1998. European Charter on the statute for judges. DAJ/DOC (98) 23. https://rm.coe.int/090000168092934f, last visited April 4, 2025.
  5. Council of Europe. 2011. Judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities, Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 17 November 2010 and explanatory memorandum. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
  6. Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). 2015. Good practice guide on enforcement of judicial decisions. https://rm.coe.int/european-commission-for-the-efficiency-of-justice-cepej-good-practice-/16807477bf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  7. Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). 2018. European judicial systems: Efficiency and quality of justice. CEPEJ Studies 26. https://rm.coe.int/rapport-avec-couv-18–09–2018-en/16808def9c, last visited April 4, 2025.
  8. Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). 2021. Specific Study of the CEPEJ on the Legal Professions: Notaries – 2018 data. https://rm.coe.int/cepej-report-data-2018-cnue/1680a4d1ec, last visited April 4, 2025.
  9. Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). 2022. Guidelines on gender equality in the recruitment and promotion of judges. https://rm.coe.int/cepej-2022–10-guidelines-on-gender-equality-en-adopted/1680a95679, last visited April 4, 2025.
  10. Chemin, Matthieu. 5/2021. Can judiciaries constrain executive power? Evidence from judicial reforms. Journal of Public Economics 199: 104–428.
  11. Cocchi, Sara, Maria Rosaria Guglielmi. 2/2020. Gender Equality in the Judiciary: Experiences and Perspectives from Italy. The Italian Law Journal 6: 385–399.
  12. Dabetić, Valerija. 2023. Izazovi konsolidacije sudstva kao nezavisne grane vlasti u Srbiji na početku 21. veka. PhD dissertation. Belgrade: University of Belgrade Faculty of Law.
  13. Dika, Mihajlo. 6/2009. Izvanparnična i koncilijacijska funkcija javnih bilježnika – de lege lata i de lege ferenda. Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu 59: 1153–1177.
  14. Duarte, Madalena, Paula Fernando, Conceição Gomes, Ana Oliveira. 1/2014. The Feminization of the Judiciary in Portugal: Dilemmas and Paradoxes. Utrecht Law Review 10: 29–43.
  15. Eagly, Alice H., Christa Nater, David I. Miller, Michèle Kaufmann, Sabine Sczesny. 3/2020. Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist 75: 301–315.
  16. Barbieri, Davide, Jakub Caisl, Simon Carpentier, Domiziana Ciacchella, Marre Karu, Blandine Mollard, Vytautas Peciukonis, Jolanta Reingardė, Lina Salanauskaitė, Irene Riobóo Lestón. 2019. Gender Equality Index 2019: Work-life balance. Vilnius: European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). https://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/mhaf19101enn_002.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  17. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). 2019. How many women have top positions in the EU candidate countries and potential candidates?, 17 September. https://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/dgs/data-talks/how-many-women-have-top-positions-eu-candidate-countries-and-potential-candidates, last visited April 4, 2025.
  18. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). 2023. Gender Equality Index: Measuring progress in the Western Balkans Publications Office of the European Union. Vilnius: European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). https://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/20233289_PDF_MH0323262ENN_002.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  19. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). 2024a. Gender Statistics Database, Supreme courts: presidents and members. https://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/dgs/indicator/wmidm_jud_natcrt__wmid_natcrt_supcrt/datatable, last visited April 4, 2025.
  20. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). 2024b. Gender Statistics Database, Constitutional courts: presidents. https://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/dgs/indicator/wmidm_jud_natcrt__wmid_natcrt_concrt/datatable, last visited April 4, 2025.
  21. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). 2024c. Gender Statistics Database, Public prosecutors. https://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/dgs/indicator/wmidm_jud_natcrt__wmid_natcrt_pubpros/datatable, last visited April 4, 2025.
  22. Duhaček, Daša, Biljana Branković, Milica Miražić. 2019. Women’s Rights in Western Balkans. Brussels: European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/608852/IPOL_STU(2019)608852_EN.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  23. Fox, Richard L., Jennifer L. Lawless. 3/2014. Uncovering the Origins of the Gender Gap in Political Ambition. The American Political Science Review 108: 499–519.
  24. GIZ and FAO. 2021. Notarial practices in Montenegro – Strengthening gender equality in land ownership and control. Rome: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8476c1fa-f86e-4d8c-8a88–6557cd6fb79e/content, last visited April 4, 2025.
  25. Gómez-Bahillo, Carlos, Carmen Elboj-Saso, Celia Marcén-Muñío. 70/2016. The feminization of the Spanish judiciary. Convergencia 23.
  26. Guilherme, Lambais, Henrik Sigstad. 6/2023. Judicial subversion: The effects of political power on court outcomes. Journal of Public Economics 217: 104–788.
  27. Margaras, Vasilis. 2019. Women in local and regional government. Brussels: European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2019/635549/EPRS_ATA(2019)635549_EN.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  28. Marguénaud, Jean-Pierre, Dauchez, Corine Namont, Dauchez Benjamin (2018), The notary, “out-of-court magistrate” with regard to the European judge of Human Rights. https://hal.science/hal-01878216/document, last visited April 4, 2025.
  29. Mouhanna, Christian. 2023. The French judiciary between feminisation and managerialisation. Trajectoires Humaines Transcontinentales.
  30. Ivanova, Еcatarina А. 4/2015. Gender imbalance in Russian judiciary: feminization of profession. The Journal of Social Policy Studies 13: 579–594.
  31. Kay, Fiona, Elizabeth Gorman. 4/2008. Women in the Legal Profession. Annual Review of Law & Social Science: 300–332.
  32. Kusyová, Veronika. 2020. Patriarchal society: oppression and gender inequality in post-Dayton Bosnia and Herzegovina. Doctoral dissertation. University of Sarajevo. https://fpn.unsa.ba/b/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Patriarchal-society-oppression-and-gender-inequality-in-post-Dayton-Bosnia-and-Herzegovina-Veronika-Kusyova.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  33. Lambais, Guilherme, Sigstad Henrik, 6/2023. Judicial subversion: The effects of political power on court outcomes. Journal of Public Economics 217: 1–11.
  34. Bauman, Robert. 2019. Notaries’ Role in Access to Justice in BC. BC Notaries Association Blog. October 5. https://www.bcnotaryassociation.ca/resources/blog/?id=2, last visited April 4, 2025.
  35. Petrović, Aleksandra. 2018. Da li je u Srbiji došlo do feminizacije pravosuđa: Žene sude, a muškarci brane. Politika, 18 March. https://www.politika.rs/sr/clanak/400327/Zene-sude-a-muskarci-brane, last visited April 4, 2025.
  36. Posner, Richard A. 2010. How Judges Think. Harvard University Press.
  37. Represent Women. 2025. Women’s Representation in the Judiciary. https://www.representwomen.org/judiciary, last visited April 4, 2025.
  38. Republic Geodetic Authority of the Republic of Serbia. 2024. Izveštaj o stanju na tržištu nepokretnosti u III kvartalu 2024. godine [Report on the state of the real estate market in the third quarter of 2024]. https://www.rgz.gov.rs/content/docs/000/000/006/Izvestaj%20o%20stanju%20na%20trzistu%20nepokretnosti%20u%20III%20kvartalu%202024.%20godine.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  39. Stanić, Miloš. 2022. Conference Report on the Role of Distinguished Legal Professionals in Judicial Councils. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/report-on-the-conference-on-prominnent-lawyers/1680adaee7, last visited April 4, 2025.
  40. Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2017. Women and men in the Republic of Serbia. Belgrade: https://publikacije.stat.gov.rs/g2017/pdfe/G20176008.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  41. Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2020. Women and men in the Republic of Serbia. Belgrade: https://publikacije.stat.gov.rs/G2021/Pdf/G20216001.pdf, last visited April 14, 2025.
  42. Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2024. Women and men in the Republic of Serbia. Belgrade: https://publikacije.stat.gov.rs/G2024/PdfE/G20246004.pdf, last visited April 14, 2025.
  43. Statistical Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2022. Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Serbia. Belgrade: https://publikacije.stat.gov.rs/G2022/Pdf/G20222055.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  44. Schultz, Ulrike. 2015. Judiciary and Gender Topics. German Experience and International Perspectives. E-cadernos CES 24: 145–149.
  45. Tax Administration of the Republic of Serbia. 2023. Podneto 29.810 prijava za utvrđivanje godišnjeg poreza na dohodak građana za 2022. godinu [There have been 29,810 applications for the 2022 annual personal income tax assessment]. https://www.purs.gov.rs/lat/odnosi-s-javnoscu/novosti/9311/podneto-29810-prijava-za-utvrdjivanje-godisnjeg-poreza-na-dohodak-gradjana-za-2022-godinu.html, last visited April 4, 2025.
  46. Tešić, Nenad. 2014. O značaju forme za promet nepokretnosti – analiza sudske prakse pre uvođenja javnobeležničkog zapisa u srpsko pravo. 482–513 in Usklađivanje poslovnog prava Srbije sa pravom Evropske unije, edited by Vuk Radović. Belgrade: University of Belgrade Faculty of Law.
  47. Tešić, Nenad, Ljubinka Kovačević. Forthcoming. Access to Justice through Public Notary Service in the Republic of Serbia: How Can the Gender Perspective Move Things Forward? Gender and the Judiciary, edited by Susanne Baer, Ivana Krstić, Ivana Jelić. Cham: Springer.
  48. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 2007. Commentary on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct. www.unodc.org/res/ji/import/international_standards/commentary_on_the_bangalore_principles_of_judicial_conduct/bangalore_principles_english.pdf, last visited April 4, 2025.
  49. UN Women. 2023. Women in Politics 2023: Women’s participation in politics is still far from equality. 23 March. https://eca.unwomen.org/en/stories/news/2023/03/women-in-politics-2023-womens-participation-in-politics-is-still-far-from-equality, last visited April 4, 2025.
  50. Valdini, Melody E, Christopher Shortell. 4/2016. Women’s Representation in the Highest Court: A Comparative Analysis of the Appointment of Female Justices. Political Research Quarterly 69: 865–876.
  51. Vuković, Ana. 3/2008. Stavovi srpske političke elite o ženama u politici. Sociološki pregled 42: 343–363.
  52. Vuković, Danilo. 1–4/2017. Advokatura u Srbiji: Rezultati empirijskog istraživanja. Branič: 103–113.
  53. Vuković, Slobodan. 4/2007. Problemi poverenja u pravosuđe. Sociološki pregled 41: 491–507.
  54. Weltevreden, Guido. 2022. Are Women More Responsible Leaders Than Men? A Study on Gender and Effects on Power Construed as Opportunity or Responsibility. Master thesis. Leiden: Leiden University Faculty of Social & Behavioural Sciences.
  55. World Bank Group. 2024. Western Balkans Regular Economic Report. Fall. https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca/publication/western-balkans-regular-economic-report, last visited April 4, 2025.
  56. Đorđević, Mila. 2/2022. Between judiciary and advocacy: professional preferences of law students in Serbia. Sociološki pregled 56: 680–708.
  57. Zendeli, Emine, Arta Selmani Bakiu. 1/2017. The Notary Service – Justice Services. SEEU Review 12: 135–147.