<p>Indicator 16.7.1(c) aims to compare the proportion of various demographic groups (by sex, age, disability status, and population group) represented in the judiciary, with the proportion of these same groups in the national population. More specifically, the proportional representation of these groups assessed across two key decision-making positions in the judiciary (judges and registrars) as well as across three ‘levels’ of courts.</p> <p>Global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) for judges can be done in three steps: </p> <p><strong>Step 1 </strong>requires data producers to compile the raw numbers of personnel in the judiciary, disaggregated along the two position types and three levels of courts. The table below provides an illustration of how this “raw” data can be compiled. (NB: For ease of presentation, this table excludes ‘total’ columns and rows, which data producers may wish to include).</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="2"> <p>Sex</p> </td> <td colspan="4"> <p>Age group</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>Disability status</p> </td> <td colspan="4"> <p>Population subgroup</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td> <td> <p>Male</p> </td> <td> <p>Female</p> </td> <td> <p><45</p> </td> <td> <p>45-54</p> </td> <td> <p>55-64</p> </td> <td> <p>65+</p> </td> <td> <p>Disabled</p> </td> <td> <p>Not disabled</p> </td> <td> <p>Group A</p> </td> <td> <p>Group B </p> </td> <td> <p>Group C</p> </td> <td> <p>Group D </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"> <p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p> </td> <td> <p>Judges</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Registrars</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"> <p>Higher-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>Judges</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Registrars</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"> <p>Lower-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>Judges</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Registrars</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Step 2</strong> then requires computing simple proportions of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups across the two position types and at each level of court.</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td rowspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of <u>female</u> personnel</strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of <u>‘young’</u> personnel aged 44 and below </strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of personnel <u>with a disability</u></strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of personnel in <u>population group(s)</u></strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Higher-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Lower-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p> </td> <td> <p><em>Example calculation: Female judges at all levels /</em></p> <p><em>All judges at all levels</em></p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Step 3 </strong>then requires generating ratios comparing the proportion of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups in the judiciary relative to the proportion of the same groups in the national population of working age, across the two position types and at each level of court.</p> <p>The World Population Prospects database, published by the United Nations Population Division, provides official statistics collected from over 230 national statistical offices on national population sizes disaggregated by age (groups) and sex. These statistics are required to calculate the denominators of the sex and age-related ratios.</p> <p>It should be noted that when comparing ratios of certain groups in the judiciary with corresponding shares of the same groups in the national population, it is important to use the working-age population of that group in the national population as a comparator i.e. the age range above the age of eligibility for that position and below the mandatory age of retirement for that position. These lower and upper age boundaries will vary depending on the country, and need to be defined by each country in the below formula. </p> <p>The resulting ratios can be interpreted as follows:</p> <ul> <li>0, when there is no representation at all in the respective sub-category of the judiciary</li> <li><1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is lower in the judiciary than in the working-age population </li> <li>=1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is equal across the judiciary and the working-age population </li> <li>>1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is higher in the judiciary than in the working-age population</li> </ul> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td rowspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Female representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of female personnel at respective level of courts / Proportion of women in the working-age population</p> </td> <td colspan="3"> <p><strong>‘Youth’ representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of ‘young’ personnel aged 44 and below at respective level of courts / Proportion of the working-age population aged above the eligibility age and below 45</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Disability representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of personnel with a disability at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons with a disability in the working-age population</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Population group(s) representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of personnel in population group(s) at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons in given population group in the working-age population</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Higher-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>Example calculation:</p> <p><em>3% disabled judges at higher-level courts / 9% disabled in the working-age population = 0.33</em></p> <p><em>🡪 Under-representation (<1)</em></p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Lower-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Prioritization:</strong></p> <p>Countries are expected to fill out the above table to the best of their ability, and to report as many representation ratios as possible, for women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups, across all position types and court levels. Meanwhile, global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) will focus on the ratios calculated across all levels of courts (i.e. the bottom row in the above table).</p>
<p>Indicator 16.7.1(c) aims to compare the proportion of various demographic groups (by sex, age, disability status, and population group) represented in the judiciary, with the proportion of these same groups in the national population. More specifically, the proportional representation of these groups assessed across two key decision-making positions in the judiciary (judges and registrars) as well as across three ‘levels’ of courts.</p> <p>Global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) for judges can be done in three steps: </p> <p><strong>Step 1 </strong>requires data producers to compile the raw numbers of personnel in the judiciary, disaggregated along the two position types and three levels of courts. The table below provides an illustration of how this “raw” data can be compiled. (NB: For ease of presentation, this table excludes ‘total’ columns and rows, which data producers may wish to include).</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td></td> <td></td> <td colspan="2"> <p>Sex</p> </td> <td colspan="4"> <p>Age group</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>Disability status</p> </td> <td colspan="4"> <p>Population subgroup</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td></td> <td></td> <td> <p>Male</p> </td> <td> <p>Female</p> </td> <td> <p><45</p> </td> <td> <p>45-54</p> </td> <td> <p>55-64</p> </td> <td> <p>65+</p> </td> <td> <p>Disabled</p> </td> <td> <p>Not disabled</p> </td> <td> <p>Group A</p> </td> <td> <p>Group B </p> </td> <td> <p>Group C</p> </td> <td> <p>Group D </p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"> <p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p> </td> <td> <p>Judges</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Registrars</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"> <p>Higher-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>Judges</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Registrars</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"> <p>Lower-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>Judges</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Registrars</p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> <td> <p></p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Step 2</strong> then requires computing simple proportions of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups across the two position types and at each level of court.</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td rowspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of <u>female</u> personnel</strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of <u>‘young’</u> personnel aged 44 and below </strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of personnel <u>with a disability</u></strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Proportion of personnel in <u>population group(s)</u></strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Higher-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Lower-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p> </td> <td> <p><em>Example calculation: Female judges at all levels /</em></p> <p><em>All judges at all levels</em></p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Step 3 </strong>then requires generating ratios comparing the proportion of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups in the judiciary relative to the proportion of the same groups in the national population of working age, across the two position types and at each level of court.</p> <p>The World Population Prospects database, published by the United Nations Population Division, provides official statistics collected from over 230 national statistical offices on national population sizes disaggregated by age (groups) and sex. These statistics are required to calculate the denominators of the sex and age-related ratios.</p> <p>It should be noted that when comparing ratios of certain groups in the judiciary with corresponding shares of the same groups in the national population, it is important to use the working-age population of that group in the national population as a comparator i.e. the age range above the age of eligibility for that position and below the mandatory age of retirement for that position. These lower and upper age boundaries will vary depending on the country, and need to be defined by each country in the below formula. </p> <p>The resulting ratios can be interpreted as follows:</p> <ul> <li>0, when there is no representation at all in the respective sub-category of the judiciary</li> <li><1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is lower in the judiciary than in the working-age population </li> <li>=1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is equal across the judiciary and the working-age population </li> <li>>1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is higher in the judiciary than in the working-age population</li> </ul> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td rowspan="2"></td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Female representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of female personnel at respective level of courts / Proportion of women in the working-age population</p> </td> <td colspan="3"> <p><strong>‘Youth’ representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of ‘young’ personnel aged 44 and below at respective level of courts / Proportion of the working-age population aged above the eligibility age and below 45</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Disability representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of personnel with a disability at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons with a disability in the working-age population</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Population group(s) representation ratio: </strong></p> <p>Proportion of personnel in population group(s) at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons in given population group in the working-age population</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Judges</strong></p> </td> <td> <p><strong>Registrars</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Higher-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>Example calculation:</p> <p><em>3% disabled judges at higher-level courts / 9% disabled in the working-age population = 0.33</em></p> <p><em>🡪 Under-representation (<1)</em></p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Lower-level courts</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td colspan="2"> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> <td> <p>…</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Prioritization:</strong></p> <p>Countries are expected to fill out the above table to the best of their ability, and to report as many representation ratios as possible, for women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups, across all position types and court levels. Meanwhile, global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) will focus on the ratios calculated across all levels of courts (i.e. the bottom row in the above table).</p>
<p>Global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) for judges can be done in three steps: </p>
<p><strong>Step 1 </strong>requires data producers to compile the raw numbers of personnel in the judiciary, disaggregated along the two position types and three levels of courts. The table below provides an illustration of how this “raw” data can be compiled. (NB: For ease of presentation, this table excludes ‘total’ columns and rows, which data producers may wish to include).</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>Sex</p>
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<p>Age group</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>Disability status</p>
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<p>Population subgroup</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>
<p>Male</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Female</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><45</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>45-54</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>55-64</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>65+</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Disabled</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Not disabled</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group A</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group B </p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group C</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group D </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Judges</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Registrars</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p>Higher-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Judges</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Registrars</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p>Lower-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Judges</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Registrars</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Step 2</strong> then requires computing simple proportions of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups across the two position types and at each level of court.</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of <u>female</u> personnel</strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of <u>‘young’</u> personnel aged 44 and below </strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of personnel <u>with a disability</u> </strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of personnel in <u>population group(s)</u></strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Higher-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Lower-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>Example calculation: Female judges at all levels /</em></p>
<p><em>All judges at all levels</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Step 3 </strong>then requires generating ratios comparing the proportion of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups in the judiciary relative to the proportion of the same groups in the national population of working age, across the two position types and at each level of court.</p>
<p>The World Population Prospects database, published by the United Nations Population Division, provides official statistics collected from over 230 national statistical offices on national population sizes disaggregated by age (groups) and sex. These statistics are required to calculate the denominators of the sex and age-related ratios.</p>
<p>It should be noted that when comparing ratios of certain groups in the judiciary with corresponding shares of the same groups in the national population, it is important to use the working-age population of that group in the national population as a comparator i.e. the age range above the age of eligibility for that position and below the mandatory age of retirement for that position. These lower and upper age boundaries will vary depending on the country, and need to be defined by each country in the below formula. </p>
<p>The resulting ratios can be interpreted as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>0, when there is no representation at all in the respective sub-category of the judiciary</li>
<li><1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is lower in the judiciary than in the working-age population </li>
<li>=1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is equal across the judiciary and the working-age population </li>
<li>>1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is higher in the judiciary than in the working-age population</li>
</ul>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Female representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of female personnel at respective level of courts / Proportion of women in the working-age population</p>
</td>
<td colspan="3">
<p><strong>‘Youth’ representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of ‘young’ personnel aged 44 and below at respective level of courts / Proportion of the working-age population aged above the eligibility age and below 45</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Disability representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of personnel with a disability at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons with a disability in the working-age population</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Population group(s) representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of personnel in population group(s) at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons in given population group in the working-age population</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Higher-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>Example calculation:</p>
<p><em>3% disabled judges at higher-level courts / 9% disabled in the working-age population = 0.33</em></p>
<p><em>🡪 Under-representation (<1)</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Lower-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Prioritization:</strong></p>
<p>Countries are expected to fill out the above table to the best of their ability, and to report as many representation ratios as possible, for women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups, across all position types and court levels. Meanwhile, global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) will focus on the ratios calculated across all levels of courts (i.e. the bottom row in the above table).</p>
<p>Global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) for judges can be done in three steps: </p>
<p><strong>Step 1 </strong>requires data producers to compile the raw numbers of personnel in the judiciary, disaggregated along the two position types and three levels of courts. The table below provides an illustration of how this “raw” data can be compiled. (NB: For ease of presentation, this table excludes ‘total’ columns and rows, which data producers may wish to include).</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>Sex</p>
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<p>Age group</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>Disability status</p>
</td>
<td colspan="4">
<p>Population subgroup</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>
<p>Male</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Female</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><45</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>45-54</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>55-64</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>65+</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Disabled</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Not disabled</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group A</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group B </p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group C</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Group D </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Judges</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Registrars</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p>Higher-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Judges</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Registrars</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p>Lower-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Judges</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Registrars</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Step 2</strong> then requires computing simple proportions of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups across the two position types and at each level of court.</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of <u>female</u> personnel</strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of <u>‘young’</u> personnel aged 44 and below </strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of personnel <u>with a disability</u> </strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Proportion of personnel in <u>population group(s)</u></strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Higher-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Lower-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>Example calculation: Female judges at all levels /</em></p>
<p><em>All judges at all levels</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Step 3 </strong>then requires generating ratios comparing the proportion of women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups in the judiciary relative to the proportion of the same groups in the national population of working age, across the two position types and at each level of court.</p>
<p>The World Population Prospects database, published by the United Nations Population Division, provides official statistics collected from over 230 national statistical offices on national population sizes disaggregated by age (groups) and sex. These statistics are required to calculate the denominators of the sex and age-related ratios.</p>
<p>It should be noted that when comparing ratios of certain groups in the judiciary with corresponding shares of the same groups in the national population, it is important to use the working-age population of that group in the national population as a comparator i.e. the age range above the age of eligibility for that position and below the mandatory age of retirement for that position. These lower and upper age boundaries will vary depending on the country, and need to be defined by each country in the below formula. </p>
<p>The resulting ratios can be interpreted as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>0, when there is no representation at all in the respective sub-category of the judiciary</li>
<li><1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is lower in the judiciary than in the working-age population </li>
<li>=1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is equal across the judiciary and the working-age population </li>
<li>>1, when the representation in the respective sub-category is higher in the judiciary than in the working-age population</li>
</ul>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Female representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of female personnel at respective level of courts / Proportion of women in the working-age population</p>
</td>
<td colspan="3">
<p><strong>‘Youth’ representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of ‘young’ personnel aged 44 and below at respective level of courts / Proportion of the working-age population aged above the eligibility age and below 45</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Disability representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of personnel with a disability at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons with a disability in the working-age population</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Population group(s) representation ratio: </strong></p>
<p>Proportion of personnel in population group(s) at respective level of courts / Proportion of persons in given population group in the working-age population</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Judges</strong></p>
</td>
<td>
<p><strong>Registrars</strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Constitutional/ supreme courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Higher-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>Example calculation:</p>
<p><em>3% disabled judges at higher-level courts / 9% disabled in the working-age population = 0.33</em></p>
<p><em>🡪 Under-representation (<1)</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Lower-level courts</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Overall (across all levels of courts)</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2">
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>…</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Prioritization:</strong></p>
<p>Countries are expected to fill out the above table to the best of their ability, and to report as many representation ratios as possible, for women, ‘youth’, persons with a disability, and specific population groups, across all position types and court levels. Meanwhile, global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(c) will focus on the ratios calculated across all levels of courts (i.e. the bottom row in the above table).</p>