The chapter interrogates the value of applying the feminist judgment methodology (FJM) to the International Criminal Court (ICC), addressing skepticism about whether such projects are merely wishful thinking. Through the metaphor of fairy tales, McLoughlin examines tensions between feminist legal theory and judicial practice, arguing that feminist judgments are not simply acts of imagination but demonstrate real possibilities within existing legal frameworks. McLoughlin makes two key arguments for extending the FJM to the ICC. First, the ICC’s poor record on gender justice, including limited convictions for sexual and gender-based crimes, makes it an important site for feminist intervention. Second, the Rome Statute’s unrealised promise of gender justice - including provisions for gender expertise and representation - provides a firm foundation for feminist judicial approaches. The chapter concludes that feminist judgment writing serves to legitimise gender-sensitive approaches to international criminal law while acknowledging law’s limitations and demonstrates how the ICC’s commitment to gender justice could be meaningfully realised through feminist judicial practice.

The chapter introduces the first collection of feminist judgments analysing decisions of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The editors outline how the book draws on the established feminist judgment methodology and extends it to international criminal law to present a range of re-written decisions from nine ICC situations. The chapter outlines the book’s three-part structure: conceptual foundations, re-written judgments with accompanying reflections, and concluding analysis. It details the editorial decisions regarding situation selection, contributor diversity, and methodological adaptations for the international context. It also describes how the book goes beyond traditional legal analysis by incorporating poetry and photography to transcend the limitations of judicial discourse. The chapter concludes that the feminist judgment method reveals significant opportunities for enhancing gender justice at the ICC, while acknowledging the Court’s political constraints. It argues that judges could deliver more gender-sensitive decisions within the existing Rome Statute framework, thereby contributing to both international criminal law scholarship and feminist legal methodology.

For eight years between 2011 and 2019, I, a French professor of law, served as a judge of the Constitutional Court of Andorra, the only woman to have been appointed to that Court since its establishment in 1993. This chapter presents a critical analysis of being a judge in Andorra, informed by the distinctive history and features of constitutional justice in the small state situated between two powerful European neighbours, and by my own personal experience. It provides insights into how the process of appointing judges and the organisation of work within the Constitutional Court accommodate foreign judges, and how diversity on the bench – in terms of the legal culture, mastery of language, professional training, gender, and the psychology of the judges – influences the way in which constitutional justice is delivered in Andorra.