ABSTRACT
Conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) remains one of the most pervasive and devastating consequences of armed conflicts worldwide. It encompasses acts such as rape, sexual slavery, forced pregnancy, and other forms of sexualized abuse deliberately used as tools of war. While international and domestic legal frameworks have made progress in recognizing CRSV as a war crime and a crime against humanity, survivors continue to face systemic obstacles in seeking justice. These include stigmatization, lack of access to trauma-sensitive procedures, and the secondary harm produced by complex, often insensitive legal systems—a phenomenon known as legal trauma.
This paper critically analyzes CRSV through the intersection of gender, war, and law, focusing primarily on the 2023 ethnic violence in Manipur (India), alongside recent global conflicts such as those in Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Using doctrinal and qualitative research methodologies, it evaluates how international humanitarian and human rights law address CRSV, identifies persistent gaps in survivor protection, and proposes trauma-informed reforms. The study concludes that while legal acknowledgment of CRSV has evolved significantly, justice mechanisms remain insufficiently survivor-centric. The adoption of trauma-informed, gender-sensitive, and community-based legal frameworks is essential to transforming recognition into meaningful redress and healing.
KEYWORDS
Conflict-related sexual violence (CRVC), war, legal trauma, survivor sensitive procedure, acountability.
INTRODUCTION
The Secretary-General’s annual reports define CRSV as “rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced abortion, enforced sterilization, forced marriage, and any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity perpetrated against women, men, girls or boys that is directly or indirectly linked to a conflict. According to the reports, CRSV “also encompasses trafficking in persons for the purpose of sexual violence and/or exploitation, when committed in situations of conflict”[1].
Conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) has long been a pervasive and normalized aspect of armed conflict, systematically used as a tactic of war, torture, humiliation, and terror. It remains a widespread consequence of conflict, displacement, and humanitarian crises—predominantly affecting women and girls, though men and boys are also victimized. CRSV inflicts profound harm on survivors, ranging from severe psychological trauma to enduring social stigma, often compounded by inadequate access to healthcare, shelter, and safety. Such trauma leads to displacement, the fragmentation of families and communities, and long-term psychological scars.
Despite significant international commitments under the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Agenda, initiated by UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and reinforced by subsequent resolutions, the advancement of women’s participation and protection remains inconsistent. Women continue to be underrepresented in peace negotiations and post-conflict recovery processes, while accountability for gender-based violence remains limited. Although international and domestic frameworks have made progress in addressing CRSV as a war crime and crime against humanity, survivors face systemic oppression and obstacles while seeking justice. These obstacles include stigmatization, lack of access to proper treatment (physical and mental), and the secondary harm caused by legal procedures, which are often highly complex and insensitive, also known as legal trauma.
This paper seeks to critically evaluate the effectiveness of the current legal framework to combat and address CRSV, with particular focus on Manipur, in comparable international context. It aims to highlight existing gaps, understand the existing legal framework’s functions, and suggest measures to maximize a survivor-centric approach to justice.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This paper employs a doctrinal legal research approach complemented by qualitative analysis. The doctrinal aspect entails a comprehensive examination of international humanitarian and human rights instruments, including:
- UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 (2000)[2], 1820 (2008)[3], and subsequent WPS agenda resolutions
- The Rome statute of the international criminal court (1998)[4]
- Geneva Convention (1949)and Additional Protocols[5]
- Regional framework, including the Maputo Protocol (2003)[6]and CEDAW (1979)[7]
The qualitative dimension includes reviewing secondary sources—scholarly articles, NGO reports, and case studies from Manipur, Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, and the DRC. Sources such as UN reports on CRSV, Human Rights Watch investigations, and Amnesty International documentation are critically analyzed to evaluate both the effectiveness and the shortcomings of legal responses.
Comparative analysis allows identification of recurring patterns of survivor retraumatization. It also integrates psychological perspectives and legal critique to assess whether the existing justice systems genuinely support survivors or cause them more harm.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Scholarly engagement with CRSV has evolved considerably since the 1990s, particularly following he Rwanda and Bosnia tribunals. The ICTR (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda) in Prosecutor v. Akayesu was the first to recognize rape as a form of genocide,[8] while the ICTY in Furundžija and Kunarac cases established rape as a crime against humanity.[9] These precedents transformed international legal understanding of sexual violence in armed conflict.
Recent academic research highlights the persistence of gendered hierarchies within legal institutions. While the law formally recognizes CRSV, its implementation remains stagnant due to structural biases, a lack of survivor-sensitive procedures, and limited access to justice.
Studies on trauma-informed lawyering show that survivors often experience secondary victimization during litigation, caused by repetitive questioning, public exposure, or distrust. The notion of legal trauma thus reveals that the very mechanism of justice may mirror the dynamics of the initial harm by stipping the survivor of their autonomy and psychological safety.[10]
In India, feminist legal scholars have critiqued the inadequacy of domestic frameworks in addressing conflict-related sexual crimes. The Manipur conflict demonstrates the failures of both state and non-state actors in preventing and responding to CRSV. Despite India’s obligations under CEDAW and UNSCR 1325, survivors continue to encounter procedural delays and institutional apathy.
Internationally, research by the UN Secretary-General on CRSV (2019–2024) notes that impunity remains widespread in conflicts such as Sudan and the DRC, where legal institutions are weak or complicit. In Ukraine, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the ICC have documented systematic sexual violence by armed forces, yet prosecutions remain minimal due to evidentiary challenges and fear of retaliation.
In Gaza, while both international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights law prohibit sexual violence, ongoing hostilities and political polarization have hindered investigations and accountability. The overlapping of military occupation and humanitarian crisis creates an environment where gender-specific violations are easily obscured.
The literature consistently underscores a central paradox: recognition without realization. The global legal regime acknowledges CRSV as a serious crime, yet survivors rarely experience meaningful justice or psychological restoration. This necessitates the integration of trauma-informed and survivor-centric legal models.
METHOD
The research adopts a comparative qualitative legal analysis of the selected case studies: Manipur (India), Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
- Manipur (India)
The ongoing ethnic conflict between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities in Manipur has resulted in harrowing instances of targeted sexual assaults against women, revealing deep gendered vulnerabilities in conflict situations. Despite robust Constitutional and statutory protections—such as Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (punishment for rape) and Section 354 (outraging a woman’s modesty)—justice remains elusive. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, enacted after the Justice Verma Committee’s recommendations, further strengthened legal provisions against sexual violence. Yet, in Manipur, survivors continue to face systemic barriers, including political reluctance, delayed investigations, and bureaucratic inefficiency. Many women endure secondary victimization through repeated testimonies, lack of confidentiality, and community ostracization. The persistence of stigma and institutional apathy not only hinders accountability but also perpetuates legal trauma, where survivors relive their suffering within the very justice system meant to protect them, highlighting a profound failure of implementation rather than legislation.
- Gaza:
The ongoing Israel–Palestine conflict exposes the deeply gendered dimensions of siege warfare. Women and girls in Gaza face heightened vulnerability amid mass displacement, blockades, and militarized detentions. Reports from UN Women and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) highlight instances of sexual and gender-based violence in detention centers and during military raids. Yet, investigations into such abuses are heavily constrained by access restrictions and political contestation. The militarized environment prevents independent inquiries, and international humanitarian law enforcement is obstructed by competing geopolitical narratives. Consequently, accountability for sexual violence in Gaza remains elusive, deeply entangled in the politics of international law. Survivors often endure silence due to fear, cultural stigma, and lack of institutional support. The absence of trauma-informed legal mechanisms aggravates psychological harm, leaving survivors caught between political invisibility and personal suffering. Gaza illustrates how the failure of international legal structures to transcend politics perpetuates impunity and intensifies gendered suffering during war. - Ukraine:
Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, numerous cases of CRSV were documented by the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Both men and women were targeted, but this case was particularly significant because the number of documented male survivors surpassed that of female survivors—a deviation from common conflict patterns. The ICC initiated investigations under Articles 7 and 8 of the Rome Statute, classifying CRSV as both a crime against humanity and a war crime. Despite these legal measures, survivors reported significant retraumatization during legal proceedings. The justice process often required them to recount their trauma multiple times in unsympathetic environments, without adequate psychological or legal support. Societal stigma surrounding sexual violence, especially against men, further silenced victims. The Ukrainian case underlines the urgent need for survivor-centered justice—legal processes that prioritize emotional safety, confidentiality, and psychological rehabilitation over evidentiary rigidity. It also underscores the necessity of training legal actors to handle CRSV cases sensitively, ensuring justice mechanisms do not become sources of renewed trauma. - Sudan:
The ongoing conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has generated widespread reports of ethnically targeted sexual violence. According to the United Nations, rape and other forms of sexual violence are being deployed as tools of war to terrorize, punish, and forcibly displace entire communities. The disintegration of Sudan’s judicial system and the collapse of governance structures have entrenched impunity, leaving survivors with no effective legal recourse. The lack of functioning courts, combined with societal stigma, results in near-total denial of justice. Many victims face social ostracization if they report assaults, while perpetrators—often members of armed groups—operate with complete immunity. This breakdown exemplifies how the erosion of the rule of law during conflict amplifies both physical and legal trauma. Survivors are forced to navigate a legal void where justice mechanisms exist only nominally, and the state itself becomes complicit through inaction. - Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC):
The DRC, often called the “rape capital of the world,” epitomizes the normalization of sexual violence in prolonged conflict. Over decades, armed groups have systematically employed rape as a weapon of domination and control. Although the Congolese government has legally recognized CRSV as an international crime, enforcement remains weak and inconsistent. Survivors frequently endure further harm during judicial processes. Many are compelled to relive their trauma in hostile courtrooms lacking confidentiality, empathy, or psychological care. The scarcity of female judges or trauma-trained prosecutors exacerbates their distress, while perpetrators—often militia members or state actors—escape punishment. This cycle of violence and impunity not only denies justice but perpetuates a culture of silence. Legal systems in such contexts, instead of providing healing, become extensions of violence themselves.
Across all cases, legal trauma emerges as a recurring pattern. Survivor’s experience within judicial and investigative frameworks replicates aspects of violence—loss of dignity, powerlessness, and disbelief. Courts rarely employ trauma-informed practices such as closed hearings, anonymous testimony, or trained psychosocial support. Thus, while international law establishes accountability norms, domestic implementation perpetuates psychological harm.
SUGGESTIONS
In the aftermath of conflict, when societies attempt to rebuild legal institutions and restore the rule of law, the role of police services becomes critical in addressing conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV). Police forces are central to the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of crimes, yet in many post-conflict settings, they are also among the key perpetrators or enablers of human rights violations. The inadequacy of police responses to sexual violence, coupled with corruption and deep-seated gender biases, often compounds the legal trauma experienced by survivors—trauma inflicted not only by the violence itself but by the legal system’s failure to deliver justice.
During and after armed conflict, police forces are often ill-equipped or unwilling to handle cases of sexual violence with the required sensitivity. In several contexts, police personnel have been implicated in sexual abuse and rights violations, targeting those perceived to oppose the state. For survivors of CRSV, engaging with the police often becomes an additional ordeal. Many victims encounter officers who refuse to file complaints, trivialize the violence as a “domestic matter,” or even subject them to further humiliation by questioning their attire or demanding proof of resistance. The absence of female police officers further alienates survivors, deterring them from reporting crimes and reinforcing a cycle of silence. Such institutional negligence not only obstructs justice but also retraumatizes survivors, violating their dignity and deepening distrust in law enforcement.
Police Reform and Gender Sensitivity
Police reform, therefore, must be viewed as a vital component of post-conflict justice and peacebuilding. Addressing CRSV requires transforming police institutions into gender-sensitive and survivor-centered entities. This involves embedding gender awareness at every stage—from recruitment and training to investigation and community engagement. Reforms must ensure that police officers are trained to recognize sexual violence as a serious crime, not a private issue, and to approach survivors with empathy, confidentiality, and professionalism.
A key reform strategy is promoting women’s participation in policing. As seen in countries like Liberia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan, integrating women into the police force enhances institutional responsiveness to gender-based violence. The presence of female officers often encourages survivors, particularly women and girls, to come forward, knowing they can report in a safer, more understanding environment. However, representation alone is insufficient. Without addressing systemic gender discrimination and workplace harassment within police institutions, women officers may conform to existing “masculine” norms or remain silent about gender issues. Thus, gender parity must be accompanied by organizational transformation—ensuring flexible work conditions, protection against harassment, and equal opportunities for advancement.[11]
Gender Training and Legal Trauma Prevention
Gender training emerges as a crucial tool for preventing both gender-based violence and the re-infliction of legal trauma. Training programs should challenge traditional gender stereotypes and power hierarchies that normalize violence. As the Beijing Platform for Action (1995) underscores, gender training within the security sector is essential to developing sensitivity to gender-based violence and ensuring human rights compliance. In practice, this means equipping police personnel with the skills to handle CRSV cases with care—understanding the psychological impacts of trauma, avoiding victim-blaming, and respecting survivors’ privacy and agency.
Successful models exist. In India, the Karnataka State Police, in collaboration with UNICEF, launched the “Gender Sensitization and People-Friendly Police Project,” developing a Training and Resource Manual focused on violence against women and children. This initiative marked a shift from punitive to preventive policing, emphasizing community trust-building and empathy. Similarly, involving women’s civil society organizations in police training—such as in Bosnia, Nepal, and Cambodia—bridges the gap between law enforcement and affected communities, fostering accountability and transparency.
Ultimately, addressing CRSV within the framework of Gender, War, and the Law demands that policing move beyond reactive justice to trauma-informed, survivor-centered practice. Legal trauma arises when survivors are revictimized by the very systems meant to protect them—through disbelief, bias, or procedural insensitivity. Gender-sensitive police reform, increased women’s participation, and sustained gender training are not merely administrative changes; they are legal and moral imperatives for ensuring justice in post-conflict societies. A reformed, accountable, and empathetic police force stands at the heart of a legal system capable of healing rather than harming, upholding human rights, and restoring faith in the rule of law.
Institutional Accountability and Structural Reform
While gender-sensitive policing is central to addressing CRSV, the sustainability of such reforms depends on broader institutional accountability. Post-conflict societies often inherit fractured justice systems where impunity prevails, particularly for crimes of sexual violence. Without clear mechanisms to investigate and prosecute abuses committed by law enforcement personnel, reforms remain superficial. Therefore, police accountability must be enshrined within national legal frameworks and overseen by independent bodies capable of conducting impartial inquiries.
Civilian oversight mechanisms—such as human rights commissions, police complaints authorities, or ombudspersons—serve as critical checks on state power. In India, for instance, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) mandated structural reforms to insulate police forces from political interference and promote accountability. However, implementation has been uneven, particularly in conflict-affected regions such as Manipur and Jammu & Kashmir, where allegations of custodial torture and sexual violence persist under the shadow of impunity. Strengthening oversight requires both legal enforcement and cultural transformation within the police—recognizing that transparency and justice are not threats to authority but expressions of it.
In conflict zones like Manipur, where CRSV has been weaponized amid ethnic violence, accountability takes on deeper significance. Survivors often fear retaliation, especially when perpetrators belong to the very security forces charged with protection. The Extra-Judicial Execution Victim Families Association v. Union of India (2016) case before the Supreme Court underscored this dilemma, as families sought justice for widespread abuses committed under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA). While the Court emphasized the need for accountability, the persistence of AFSPA’s blanket immunity continues to obstruct justice for victims, including those of sexual violence. Meaningful reform, therefore, demands the repeal or amendment of laws that shield state actors from prosecution, replacing impunity with due process and institutional transparency.
Comparative Insights from Global Contexts
The experiences of post-conflict societies such as Rwanda, Bosnia, and South Sudan reveal that police reform must occur alongside judicial and societal transformation. In Rwanda, following the 1994 genocide, community-based justice mechanisms (Gacaca courts) were complemented by gender-sensitive policing initiatives that trained officers to address sexual violence with compassion and confidentiality. Similarly, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the establishment of specialized gender units within police departments—supported by the UN Development Program—significantly improved survivor reporting rates and reduced secondary victimization.
In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), often termed the “rape capital of the world,” decades of reform have underscored the need for local ownership. Internationally funded police reform projects often falter when they fail to adapt to community realities. Grassroots initiatives led by Congolese women’s organizations have proven more sustainable—training local police in trauma-informed response and community engagement. These models illustrate that the success of gender-sensitive policing lies not merely in imported frameworks but in context-specific adaptation, cultural legitimacy, and survivor trust.
Manipur presents a similar challenge. The restoration of peace and law in the wake of ethnic conflict between Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities cannot occur without addressing the gendered dimensions of violence. The inclusion of women from both communities in policing, truth-seeking, and reconciliation processes could foster mutual confidence and ensure that justice mechanisms are not perceived as partisan. Integrating gender and ethnic sensitivity within the Manipur Police’s training curriculum, modeled on the DRC and Bosnia frameworks, would mark a step toward a survivor-centered approach rooted in the local context.
Survivor-Centered Justice and Legal Trauma Mitigation
Survivor-centered justice recognizes that legal responses must prioritize the dignity, agency, and recovery of victims. This approach aligns with the principles outlined in the UN Women’s Handbook for Legislation on Violence against Women (2012), which advocates for integrated support systems—legal, medical, and psychosocial—to accompany formal justice mechanisms. In practice, this means creating “one-stop centers” where survivors can report crimes, receive counseling, and access legal aid in a confidential and supportive environment.[12]
Preventing legal trauma requires moving beyond punitive justice to restorative frameworks that acknowledge survivors’ suffering and promote healing. Police officers, prosecutors, and judges must be trained to handle testimony without retraumatization—avoiding invasive questioning, moral judgment, or disbelief. The Justice Verma Committee Report (2013) in India made this imperative explicit, recommending comprehensive police reforms and sensitivity training to address gender-based violence. Despite progress, implementation remains inconsistent, particularly in conflict-prone regions.
In Manipur, where the militarization of daily life has normalized fear and silence, community policing initiatives rooted in empathy could rebuild trust. Collaborations between the state police, local women’s groups, and human rights defenders would enable a more participatory model of justice. Such engagement not only enhances reporting mechanisms but symbolically redefines the police as protectors rather than perpetrators.
CONCLUSION
Conflict-related sexual violence remains a grim constant across global conflicts—from Manipur to Gaza, Sudan to Ukraine. It represents not only a violation of bodily autonomy but also a profound attack on human dignity and collective identity. International law, through the Rome Statute and UNSCR 1325 framework, has progressively recognized CRSV as among the gravest crimes. Yet recognition alone is insufficient. Survivors continue to encounter institutional barriers, stigma, and secondary victimization in their pursuit of justice.
The Manipur case underscores that CRSV is not distant—it occurs within democracies, exposing gaps in state accountability and gender justice. Legal trauma, as a recurring outcome, reflects the failure of current legal systems to address the psychological dimension of justice.
To transform law from a site of retraumatization into one of healing, justice must become survivor-centric, trauma-informed, and contextually grounded. Courts must adapt their procedures to human realities, not the reverse. A trauma-informed legal order—one that listens, protects, and restores—offers the only sustainable path toward both justice and reconciliation in the aftermath of conflict-related sexual violence.
NAME: PARWANI DAWALE
ILS LAW COLLEGE, PUNE
[1] August 2025 Monthly Forecast: Thematic Issues — Women, Peace and Security, SECURITY COUNCIL REPORT (30 July 2025), https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2025-08/women-peace-and-security.php.,
[2] United Nations Security Council, Resolution 1325, U.N. Doc. S/RES/1325 (Oct. 31, 2000), available at
[3] S.C. Res. 1820, U.N. Doc. S/RES/1820 (June 19, 2008), available at
[4] Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, July 17, 1998, 2187 U.N.T.S. 90.
[5] Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, June 8, 1977, 1125 U.N.T.S. 3, available at
https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/external/doc/en/assets/files/other/icrc_002_0321.pdf
[6] Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights ostrippingn the Rights of Women in Africa, July 11, 2003, 2nd Ordinary Session, AU Doc. CAB/LEG/66.6 (entered into force Nov. 25, 2005).
[7] Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 34/180 of 18 December 1979 entry into force 3 September 1981, in accordance with article 27(1)
[8] The Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu (Trial Judgement), ICTR-96-4-T, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), 2 September 1998, https://www.refworld.org/jurisprudence/caselaw/ictr/1998/en/19275 [accessed 14 October 2025]
[9] International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women, Peace and Security, at 5 (Oct. 30, 2006), https://www.un.org/womenwatch/ianwge/taskforces/wps/implementation_review_30Oct2006/ICTY%20Response.pdf.
[10] GODDEN-RASUL, N., & WIPER, C. (2024). Trauma-informed lawyering in the context of civil claims for sexual violence. Journal of Law and Society, 51(2), 189-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12453India
[11] Megan Bastick, Karin Grimm & Rahel Kunz, Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict: Global Overview and Implications for the Security Sector, GENEVA CENTRE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OF ARMED FORCES (2007), available at https://www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/sexualviolence_conflict_full.pdf.
[12] UN Women. (2012). Handbook for Legislation on Violence against Women. United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women.
Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2012/12/UNW_Legislation-Handbook%20pdf.pdf