A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE TO INCREASING WOMEN’S ACCESS TO ELECTORAL JUSTICE Findings Finding 1: There is a lack of research on women’s access to electoral justice and a dearth of gender-disaggregated information. In general, there is a dearth of gender-disaggregated data in the elections and politics space. This information could be helpful in identifying barriers to women’s equal and meaningful participation and in developing data-driven and evidence-based solutions to address those challenges. While the Inter-Parliamentary Union maintains an up-to-date database of the proportion of women in national parliaments around the world, there is no regularly updated global database of gender-disaggregated data related to local elected bodies, voter registration, or voter turnout. As with other elections-related data, many countries also do not collect gender-disaggregated information on electoral dispute issues, including on who files cases or complaints. Gender-disaggregated data related to electoral complaints could be used to determine whether women and men file different types of complaints, whether cases filed by women or men complainants are equally likely to succeed, and to better understand women’s experiences of electoral justice. Some evidence from an IFES EDR assessment in Ukraine showed that police investigators and prosecutors were not effective in gathering the evidence needed for electoral violation claims, leading to a small number of charges being filed and even fewer convictions. This was “particularly true of gender specific violations and sexual harassment of women candidates,” demonstrating the type of analysis that could be done with more widely available genderdisaggregated data.56 The Handbook for the Observation of Election Dispute Resolution from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) specifically asks election observers to record any grievances about the unequal treatment of women in the electoral process, assess whether women’s complaints are handled in the same manner as others, and take note of when such grievances exist but women choose not to file.57 Despite this guidance, there is a lack of robust gender analysis related to EDR in the election observer reports reviewed for this study. There is also a lack of centralized, updated data on how many women have roles in EDR bodies and judicial institutions, particularly at the local and regional levels. While having women as police, detectives, electoral officials, judges, prosecutors, and in other important roles does not necessarily mean that EDR systems will be more gendersensitive, descriptive representation remains important. EDR and other electoral bodies will certainly do better to garner the trust of the public if those institutions look like the population they represent. Finding 2: Many countries have national legal frameworks that prohibit gender discrimination and guarantee women’s political participation, but enforcement of these laws remains a challenge. Though women face barriers to accessing electoral justice in many places, many countries have legislation or commitments to international law that guarantee women’s equal right to participate in politics and elections. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is a legally binding international treaty that guarantees women a set of universal rights, including the right to participate meaningfully and equally in public life (Article 7) and to equality before the law (Article 15). Almost every country has ratified the treaty, with the exception of the Holy See, Iran, Niue, Somalia, Sudan, Tonga, and the United States.58 In addition to CEDAW, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, known as one of the fundamental texts for human and civil rights, states that all people are entitled to equal protection under the law and that “everyone has the right to an effective remedy Ennis, D., and Ellena, K. (2018). Electoral Justice for Ukraine Assessment and Recommendations. IFES – The International Foundation for Electoral Systems. (Not publicly available). 57 Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. (2019b). 58 United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (2022). Ratification status for CEDAW - Treaty Body Database. 56 34