From the Court to the Classroom: Judges’ Work in International Judicial Education

49 Cornell International Law Journal 618 (2016).This Article explores international judicial education and training, which are commonly associated with rule of law initiatives and development projects. Judicial education programs address everything from leadership competencies and substantive review of human rights legislation to client service and communication, skills training on docket management software, and alternative dispute resolution. Over the last twenty years, judicial education in support of the rule of law has become big business both in the United States and internationally. The World Bank alone spends approximately U.S. $24 million per year for funded projects primarily attending to improving court performance. And yet, the specifics of judicial education remains unknown in terms of its place in the industry of rule of law initiatives, the number of judges who act as educators, and the mechanisms that secure their participation. This Article focuses on the judges’ experiences; in particular, the judges of the Supreme Court of Israel who were instrumental in establishing the International Organization of Judicial Training.Lawyers, development practitioners, justice experts, and government officials participate in training judges. Less well known is the extent to which judges themselves interact internationally as learners, educators, and directors of training institutes. While much scholarly attention has been paid to finding a global juristocracy in constitutional law, scholars have overlooked the role that judges play in the transnational movement of ideas about court structure, legal procedure, case management, and court administration. Similarly, scholarship examines the way legal norms circulate, the source of institutional change, and the way “transnational legal processes” increase the role of courts within national legal systems. There is little scholarly attention, however, to judges as actors in these transnational processes. This Article situates judicial education and training within the context of judicial functions as an example of judicial involvement in non-caserelated law reform. This Article challenges the instrumental connection between judicial education and the rule of law, arguing that international judicial education became a solution at the same time that the problem— a rule of law deficit— was being identified. This Article also explores whether international judicial education can stand as an instantiation of a global judicial dialogue. Judges have immersed themselves in foreign relations. They are, however, less strategic in pushing their ideological agenda than literature about judges and politics would suggest. This Article argues that judges experience politics as a series of partial connections, which resemble most legal actors’ engagement with the personal and the political.