Out of 1,079 (42 percent) and 7 out of 34 judges (20 percent), the vacancies are significant. There are around 426 judges. But it affords a chance for the lack of women’s representation in higher judicial systems to be addressed. In the current environment, the cause of the first female CJI is not possible for six years. But it can be and should be attempted at this time, both in the high courts and at the Supreme Court, to provide women a proper and adequate representation. In order to eliminate prejudice between men and women, that will ultimately lead to greater social and gender harmony in the judiciary. In any way, a social standard with more young women students coming up and opting for law as a profession will be a step in that direction.
Judiciary is not to be trusted if it is seen in the face of changes in society and the needs of the most vulnerable as a stronger stronghold of elitism, exclusivity, and privilege. Indeed, if judges themselves are discriminatory, it will be difficult for citizens to respect the court as their protector of law and human rights. Therefore, for the credibility of the judicial, the participation of women is vital. It is not simply because it is right for women, but also because it is right for women to create a more just rule of law that the equality of women’s judges must be achieved, in terms of representation at all levels of the judiciary and in political judicial committees. Women judges enhance the judiciary and contribute to public confidence. However, female judges do not improve their appearance but contribute much more to justice: they also add considerably to the quality of decisions and hence to the quality of justice itself. Women judges worldwide have obtained the required credentials, achieved achievements, and otherwise complied with legal selection requirements. We live as women, however, with all the social and cultural influences that women experience, including complex family and commitments.
The International Group of Women Judges, a non-governmental association including more than 6,000 members in over 85 nations worldwide, has focused on evaluating from a gender viewpoint in particular. It can be eliminated only by the deliberate and systematic identification of prejudice. Over the years, our members have taken part in judicial training in the interpretation and enforcement of the law in a way that is free from sexual interference. Change in the long-established demographics of a court can make it more convenient for the institution to see itself in a fresh light. As the membership of a court diversifies, its usual practice is less established; hence, the previous techniques are no longer suitable, often dependent on unstated behavior rules or simply inertia. This may be a good opportunity to carry out the comprehensive evaluation, to adopt and implement revised judicial regulations, and to train judges according to clearly defined standards. With new voices, the presence of new faces is frequently the most powerful stimulus to look at things again.