91ɫ��Ƭ

Strengthening the rule of law in Brazil increasingly depends on judicial leadership that recognises social inequality, institutional power and lived experience, 91ɫ��Ƭ Law & Justice academics say.

That approach sits behind the , an international collaboration led by 91ɫ��Ƭ Law & Justice with its Law Schools Global League partner and the (UFMG), developed in close cooperation with . 91ɫ��Ƭ Law & Justice is lead convenor, contributing academic leadership, instructional expertise and program design, while also coordinating collaboration between scholars, judicial leaders and institutions across jurisdictions. 

 The program was developed in response to the growing complexity of judicial decision‑making in Brazil, where federal and state judges increasingly confront constitutional disputes, emerging technologies, international human rights frameworks and parallel systems of justice. 

Program leaders argue that judicial training must therefore extend beyond technical legal expertise to include leadership development and a deeper understanding of how law operates within society. 

Targeted initiatives such as the Women Judges Program support judges to meet these challenges, while strengthening judicial legitimacy and public confidence in legal institutions. 

Persistent gender gaps in Brazil’s senior judiciary 

While women make up 43 per cent of lower court judges in Brazil, their representation drops sharply at senior levels. Only 18 per cent of judges in higher courts are women, and just three women have ever been appointed to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court. 

Scientia Professor and Anthony Mason Professor Rosalind Dixon emphasises that diversity in the judiciary is not simply about representation. 

“A judiciary drawn from a broad range of backgrounds strengthens public confidence in legal institutions, supports substantive equality of opportunity, and improves the quality of judicial reasoning by incorporating a wider range of lived experience,” Prof Dixon says.  “In this way it also helps promote the resilience of democracy constitutional systems – the key aim of our new ."��

The Women Judges Program is designed to address persistent structural barriers faced by women judges. These include limited access to promotion pathways, the dismissal of gendered or intersectional reasoning, and institutional cultures that treat neutrality as detachment from social reality. 

Diversity as a strength in judicial reasoning 

91ɫ��Ƭ Law & Justice Professor Lucas Lixinski, who helped deliver the program teaching on human rights in Brazil, explains that judicial impartiality should not be confused with neutrality. 

“Judging that ignores historical and social power hierarchies risks reproducing inequality,” Prof Lixinski says. “Recognising difference and understanding structural injustice does not undermine impartiality. It enables it.” 

 This approach aligns with broader work underway at 91ɫ��Ƭ to address inequality and strengthen democratic institutions, including through the Resilient Democracy Lab, the Gender Equality Hub and initiatives such as the NSW Pathways to Politics Program for Women, which aims to empower diverse women to run for political office. 

“Empowerment programs of this kind are also important across all public institutions, including the courts,” Prof Dixon says.  “In the judicial context, both commitments to democracy and equality require us to embed equity, diversity and inclusion into legal reasoning, leadership and institutional culture, rather than treating them as peripheral concerns.” 

Research, practice and leadership development combined 

The structure of the program reflects these aims. Delivered over three days on a hybrid basis in Brazil, and potentially later in Sydney and London, the training combines practical skill development, judicial research methods and individual mentoring. Professor Gabrielle Appleby and Dr Elisabeth Perham focused specifically on the development of judicial leadership skills, and on what feminist judicial leadership looks like – whether exercised by men or women. 

“Many participants are interested in progressing to higher courts, and it is important that women are supported to do that” Dr Perham says. “More broadly, participants were interested in thinking about how to work with each other and their male colleagues to promote a more diverse judiciary, including through shifting institutional culture from within – both in relation to removing barriers to the progression of women, and in relation to ensuring diverse perspectives are reflected in the work of the courts.” 

Dr Ashleigh Barnes, who co-delivered a session on the doctrine of precedent, remarks that “in Brazil, where the doctrine of precedent is novel and operates differently, the influence of lower court judges can be especially significant.” 

A model for future judicial capacity building 

91ɫ��Ƭ Law & Justice’s contribution is marked by the integration of research, practice and leadership development. Expertise in feminist legal theory, critical judging, constitutionalism and public law is paired with practical training and mentoring, ensuring scholarly insights translate into institutional impact. 

“The Faculty members from 91ɫ��Ƭ Law & Justice who participated brought deep expertise in judicial method, regulation, and critical, particularly feminist, judging, leadership development, as well as experience in judicial training and engagement, and training for senior civil servants across government,” Prof Appleby says. “Just as importantly, we brought a strong commitment to social justice, and to ensuring the law reflects and services the people it affects.” 

The Women Judges Program has attracted strong interest as a model for future collaboration between universities and judicial institutions. Program leaders see opportunities to expand the initiative, deepen engagement with participants, and adapt the model for other jurisdictions seeking to strengthen judicial capacity and equity. 

As a Higher Degree Research candidate working closely on the delivery of the program, Daniel Vieira Bogea Soares credits its success to the leadership and groundwork laid by women in the Faculty and across Brazil’s judiciary and legal academy. “I would not have been in a position to help deliver this program without the women who paved the way here in the faculty and in Brazil’s judiciary and legal academy,” he says. 

“In my sessions, I focused on questions of judicial strategy and statecraft, debating how courts navigate institutional constraints and exercise leadership in complex democratic settings,” Bogea Soares says.  “Being Brazilian meant I could approach these conversations with cultural fluency, but being an ally also meant knowing when to step back and support women’s leadership rather than speak over it.”  

Listening to participants and responding to their priorities will shape the program’s next phase. Success, Prof Appleby notes, may be measured in many ways. 

“It could look like more confident women judges, more women advancing in the judiciary, a stronger and more connected community of women judges across the country, and more men in the judiciary identifying as feminists and allies,” she says.