Comparative (in)equalities: CEDAW, the jurisdiction of gender, and the heterogeneity of transnational law production
Author: Resnik, Judith
Source: International Journal of Constitutional Law, Volume 10, Number 2, 30 March 2012 , pp. 531-550(20)
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Abstract:A formal model of treaty-making identifies nation-states as pivotal parties to transactions. A formal model of equality rejects distinctions treating women and men differently. Both kinds of formalisms miss practices making plain the permeable boundaries of the nation-state, the variegated texture of transnational lawmaking, and the challenges of materializing equal treatment.
This essay explores these boundary-bendings by examining the affiliations with, reservations to, and antagonism generated by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), empowering discursive exchanges between the U.N.-based expert committee overseeing CEDAWs implementation and the ratifying states. Interactions around CEDAW depart from the uniformity and universalism often associated with international law. Rather than a singular formal moment of ratification through a monovocal nation-state, the parties to CEDAW file, and some withdraw, reservations; the CEDAW Committee reviews and questions practices of party-states and episodically issues new general directives; and a few localities make CEDAW domestic law while others aim to ward off any such efforts by general bans on references to foreign law.
National treaty reservations and subnational internationalism join other mediating mechanismssuch as judicial doctrines providing a margin of appreciation or federalism discounts that permit some deviance among subunits and forms of constitutional pluralism that reflect constrained affiliations across borders. These diverse legal postures underscore the heterogeneity found in transnational exchanges and, in addition to the positive account of the need to recognize these facets of lawmaking, the normative argument advanced is to appreciate the utilities of disaggregated internationalism that, in the context explored here, reveals the challenges of operationalizing aspirations for equality.
Document Type: Research Article
Publication date: 30 March 2012
- Published in association with the New York University School of Law, I"CON is dedicated to international and comparative constitutional law. I"CON has international editorial and advisory boards and an international focus. It examines an array of theoretical and practical issues and offers critical analysis of current issues and debates. In addition, I"CON looks at global trends that carry constitutional implications. It features scholarly articles by international legal scholars, judges, and people from related fields, such as economics, philosophy, and political science.