The judge lottery: Female versus male judges’ decision-making toward restorative justice in intimate partner violence

The aim of this paper is to uncover the difference in perception and decisions between male and female judges toward restorative justice in intimate partner violence. The research takes a qualitative method approach, according to which 15 male judges and 15 female judges in Bogotá Colombia were interviewed. The information was analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings suggest that a case-by-case rule is followed, which is motivated by the enthusiasm toward restorative justice and the need to deny its application when certain situations occur. Although the case-by-case rule can be seen as a similarity, there were also found some differences. For instance, female judges interviewed are more flexible toward the penalty limit imposed for restorative justice compared with male judges. In addition, they exposed a personal resistance toward the application of restorative justice in this offense, while male judges manifested a social and media one.