In celebration of the 52nd World Environment Day on June 5, the International Association of Women Judges co-hosted a webinar called Environmental Rule of Law through a Gender Lens: The Role of Women and Judiciaries. This collection of speakers with subject matter expertise would not be possible without IAWJ collaborations with the United Nations Environment Programme, the University of Bradford, the Committee on Teaching of International Law, and the SDGs of the International Law Association of Nigeria.
As a young scholar who has worked on environmental education programs and research, the intersection of environmental law and women’s rights is particularly intriguing. We often hear that women in the Global South are disproportionately affected by climate change, but not nearly as often about women as agents of change, on the bench and beyond.
Professor Patricia Kameri-Mbote, Director of the Law Division at UNEP, highlighted this dissonance in her opening remarks, speaking about the vulnerabilities of women, the agency of women, and the rule of law as inextricably linked to each other and to climate change. She also touched on the focus of this year’s World Environment Day: pushing towards a legally binding instrument to reduce plastic pollution as an overarching theme.
The role of the judiciary, she stated, is to “be both guardians and implementers of the law, and take active measures to respect, protect and fulfill human rights, especially those related to the environment.” Professor Kameri-Mbote cited Klimaseniorinnen v Switzerland as well as Maria Khan et al. v. The Federation of Pakistan as cases where the judiciary played its role well. In both cases, coalitions of women brought their cases to court, arguing that their respective nations were violating constitutional and international human rights through climate change inaction, given the disproportionate impacts on women.
Next, Dr. Pedi Obani, Associate Professor at the University of Bradford Law School, followed with her keynote address. She built on Professor Mbote’s points with her recent research findings on the factors that affect women’s experiences with climate change. She coined the acronym VEIDA, standing for Vulnerability, disproportionate Exposure, lack of Involvement in decision making, Demographic factors, and Adaptability. According to Dr. Obani’s research, these key factors contribute significantly to how climate change exacerbates existing gender inequalities.
However, the stories of women who bear the brunt of environmental degradation cannot all be boiled down to just one of these factors. Dr. Obani paid homage to her hometown of Port Harcourt in Nigeria, telling one story of a woman farmer, Tamara, and the impact of the oil refining industry on her community. Tamara can no longer grow crops due to plastic pollution and oil spills, and there is a complete lack of employment options outside the industry. With the breakdown of cultural systems around farming, there are essentially no role models for children, and she worries about their futures. With women like Tamara struggling to keep their households afloat and unable to afford relocation, their access to justice is limited. In a powerful appeal to the women judges in the audience, Dr. Obani asked them to consider: “Whose stories are legitimized and who receives remedy? What remedy can genuinely restore dignity rather than just compliance?”
This call to action resonated deeply with me. I have always held a personal belief that women in leadership, those in the judiciary in particular, are uniquely positioned to advocate for justice, not only within their own communities but also on behalf of women around the world.
As if reading my mind, IAWJ then connected with three incredible women justices from across the world with various experiences in environmental law. The panelists were Justice Nicola Pain of the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, Justice Barke Mbaraka Aboud Sehel of the Court of Appeal of Tanzania, and finally, Justice Suntariya Muanpawong of the Appeal Court of Thailand and the Judicial Administration Commission.
When asked about their perception of the linkage between climate change and women’s rights based on cases they have adjudicated, Justice Pain set the stage by pointing out that, according to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law’s Litigation Databases, there are now thousands of cases and counting, with regional cases more recently surfacing. She also recognized that the social impacts for women in rural communities where there is mostly a male workforce are disproportionate. Justice Muanpawong concurred, noting that the first place many judges learn about environmental cases is in labor courts. With women expected to take on the traditional role of homemaker with dwindling access to natural resources, Justice Aboud Sehel cites a domestic abuse case stating that the “survival of women and girls becomes a struggle because of the things beyond their control.”
Listening to their insights, I was struck by how each case, although they went through a different legal system and process, was grounded in a common reality. Women's lived experiences are inextricably linked to environmental harms, yet rarely centered in formal adjudication. It reminded me how critical it is for those in power to move beyond theory and truly listen.
For all three panelists, this awareness of how environmental degradation intersects with gender-based vulnerability naturally allowed them to reflect on how their identity as women judges shapes their approach to environmental law. Justice Muanpawong spoke with conviction about the unique ability of women in leadership, whether judges, scientists, or community leaders, to exercise their sense of justice. Of her fellow women judges, she says, “We care to protect the common interest, we have [the] courage to fight and we have the ability to collaborate.” Justice Pain and Aboud Sehel concur, citing activist Vandana Shiva, who had a feminist view on protecting the environment, and the idea that the strongest institutions are the most diverse as inspiration.
These words have stayed with me far beyond the panel. The panelists’ unique inspirations and sense of responsibility reminded me that more women in leadership means a more diverse bench, but also a complete restructuring in the way we think about justice being served.
That said, current legal norms make it difficult for women judges to support gender-responsive environmental adjudications. Justice Aboud Sehel suggests an expansion of judicial education, so judges remain aware of the links between environmental law and women’s rights, as well as more women in decision-making roles. She predicts that these changes would lead to more “sustainable and equitable” rulings, which in turn would set a precedent for defending women’s rights. Justice Muanpawong agreed, citing a common phenomenon she has seen where judges are environmentally friendly due to their extensive education and experience, but largely not gender sensitive. Justice Pain added that once environmental cases make it to the court, institutional capacity for them must also be increased, whether that is through more green benches or by altered court procedures that support achievement in gender responsive environmental adjudication. She added that applying restorative justice processes to the civil area could be a critical way to control for power imbalances in case presentation, and therefore, support gender responsive rulings.
Reflecting on these thoughtful recommendations, I believe transformation in our legal systems and in our ways of thinking is necessary, now more than ever. If the effects of climate change are to be stopped or even reversed in our lifetime, it is especially important to center the stories of those it affects the most. Without women’s experience leading the charge, it is nearly impossible to achieve true environmental justice.
Watch the webinar recording here.