Abdi Aidid

Accessing Gender Justice

Introduction

Accessing gender justice. Challenges technocratic access to justice for gendered harms. Highlights inaccessible legal services' impact on women, stresses lawyers' role, and warns of AI's risks.

Abstract

This article examines contemporary access to justice discourse through the lens of gender justice, challenging the prevailing preference for technocratic interventions focused narrowly on court performance. It argues that such a limited perspective misunderstands the judiciary's complex interpretive, expressive, and interventionary functions, especially vital in addressing gendered harms. By exploring the phenomenon of juridification - in short, the increasing salience of law - this analysis reveals how gender justice advocacy relies upon civil adjudication for both protection and broader social meaning. Yet current reforms often fail to recognize how inaccessible legal services and courts uniquely disadvantage women. The article calls for an expansive reimagining of access to justice, emphasizing the lawyer's critical role in translating nuanced, morally charged grievances into legally cognizable claims. It concludes by cautioning that this expansive reimagining is critical to avoid some of the flattening effects of emerging artificially intelligent legal technologies, which present opportunities for improved access to justice but also risk entrenching existing inequities if not thoughtfully calibrated.

Review

The article "Accessing Gender Justice" offers a timely and incisive critique of prevailing access to justice (A2J) discourse, arguing compellingly for a reframing through the crucial lens of gender justice. It effectively challenges the dominant technocratic approach, which often prioritizes narrow metrics of court performance, by demonstrating how this limited perspective overlooks the judiciary's multifaceted interpretive, expressive, and interventionary functions, particularly vital in addressing gendered harms. By exploring the phenomenon of juridification, the authors establish how gender justice advocacy significantly relies on civil adjudication not only for protection but also for broader social meaning, making its central thesis particularly pertinent for contemporary legal scholarship. A significant strength of this article lies in its robust articulation of how current A2J reforms often fail to acknowledge the unique disadvantages women face due to inaccessible legal services and courts. The analysis skillfully unpacks the complexities of translating nuanced, morally charged grievances into legally cognizable claims, highlighting the indispensable role of the lawyer in this process. This emphasis on the qualitative aspects of legal access, rather than mere quantitative throughput, represents a vital intellectual contribution. The article thus moves beyond a superficial understanding of "access" to underscore the deeply embedded structural and experiential barriers that impede genuine gender justice. The article's call for an expansive reimagining of access to justice is exceptionally well-argued and forward-looking, culminating in a critical caution regarding the "flattening effects" of emerging artificially intelligent legal technologies. This foresight is commendable, as it anticipates potential risks of entrenching existing inequities if these technologies are not thoughtfully calibrated. Overall, "Accessing Gender Justice" provides a powerful and nuanced intervention into both access to justice and gender studies, urging a more holistic and human-centered approach to legal reform. It is a valuable and thought-provoking contribution that deserves wide readership and engagement.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.