{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023582954075299957, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016549441456350848, 'mean_word_length': 5.168367346938775, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Gender and judicial education

Judicial education has greatly expanded in common law countries in the past 25 years. More recently it has become a core component in judicial reform programmes in developing countries with gender attentiveness as an element required by donor agencies. In civil law jurisdictions like France, judges’ schools have long played a role in the formation of the career judiciary with a focus on entry to the judicial profession and in-service education. In Germany judges get an intensive in-service education at judicial academies. Gender questions, however, tend to be neglected in the curricula. These judicial education activities have generated a significant body of material and experience which it is timely to review and disseminate. Questions such as the following require answers. What is the current state of affairs? How is judicial education implemented in developed and developing countries all around the world? Who are the educators? Who is being educated? What are the theories of gender and equality underlying and informing these programmes? How is judicial education on gender regarded by judges? How effective are these programmes? The contributions in this special issue deal with these questions. They provide a multiplicity of perspectives. Six countries are represented; of these four are civil law countries (Germany, Argentina, Japan, and Bosnia and Herzegovina) and two are common law countries (Canada and Uganda), although the principles which have traditionally characterized civil and common law countries are blurring. The education and recruitment for the judiciary differ among civil law countries. Balkan countries have adopted principles of American procedural law and in recent years Japan as well as China have tended to look more towards US American law and legal education rather than to continental Europe. Some of the countries, such as Germany, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Argentina have a high percentage of women judges, at least at the lower echelons of the court systems, while in common law countries and Japan the share of women judges remains comparatively low. The importance of dealing with judicial education and the inclusion of gender aspects became evident when Gisela Shaw and Ulrike Schultz put together the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION, 2014 Vol. 21, No. 3, 255–257, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09695958.2015.1066944