16 - Towering versus Collegial Judges: A Comparative Reflection

Summary

This chapter offers a concluding reflection on the idea of a towering judge, its value, complexity and potential dangers.  Drawing on prior chapters and contributions, it suggests that the idea of a towering judge could be understood in more or less objective/subjective, national/international and relative/absolute terms, as well as across different time frames. It notes the value in asking these questions, as well as in studying the jurisprudence of leading judges cross-nationally.  At the same time, it suggests several potential dangers associated with a focus on ‘towering judges’.  The idea of a towering judge may tend to privilege chief justices over other leading judges, and male over female justices. And it may not always be a good thing for the courts on which a judge serves. The chapter therefore concludes the volume with a note of caution: even while acknowledging the value of studying leading judges, we might ultimately do better to celebrate more collegial, non-dominant forms of judicial leadership.