How Do We Address Sexual Violence in Conflict? Answering That Question Depends on How Well We Understand It.

It has been six years since Nadia Murad — Yazidi human rights activist — and Dr. Denis Mukwege — Congolese gynecologist and global campaigner against sexual violence — were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2018, marking a pivotal moment in global awareness of sexual violence in war and armed conflict. But while there have been notable advances since in legal jurisprudence, efforts in reparative justice, and improved engagement with survivors to minimize retraumatization, these efforts have not translated into preventing or decreasing the rate of sexual violence.

In fact, evidence points to a rise in sexual violence, in countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Haiti, South Sudan, Ukraine, Libya, Myanmar, Iraq, and — most recently — Israel and Palestine.

Why is it, in fact, increasing? Like all crimes, sexual violence must be understood within the broader context in which it occurs. The factors contributing to this increase are multifaceted but can generally be linked to the increased militarization of societies, the proliferation of arms, and deterioration of the rule of law.

Perhaps one of the most apparent disservices to justice — and reform — is how we approach this question, if at all. In media, the portrayal of these crimes often veers toward sensationalism, which is often gratuitous in its details of violence without explaining the historical and social structures that enabled it. Not only can this reporting be inaccurate (and, indeed, harmful to victims), but it can risk future access to justice, for which there already exist significant barriers. Both the laws and the media fixate on perpetrators while excising perhaps the most important component from view: the victims.

Rigid and inadequate legal frameworks leave countless survivors without proper legal recognition of the harm suffered, facing unnecessarily burdensome, discriminatory, and retraumatizing procedures. And without proper recognition, a vision of justice that honors them and their desires remains elusive.

The real question we should be asking ourselves in order to adequately address these crimes, then, is how can our collective obligation to end sexual violence center the people it is happening to?

To start with, a survivor-centric process would prioritize the needs of survivors, including their access to holistic, wraparound care services — medical, psychological, legal, and socio-economic support — to rebuild their lives. Oftentimes, from media hyperexposure or cultural stigma, survivors of sexual violence are ostracized or reduced to what happened to them, the attention paid to them only sustained for as long as the cameras are rolling.

A holistic approach takes into account the possibility of offering long-term support, such as ongoing counseling, community reintegration, and economic empowerment. For instance, the Panzi Hospital in the DRC, founded by Dr. Mukwege, offers holistic care encompassing medical treatment, psychological support, legal assistance, and socio-economic support. Similarly, the United Nations Population Fund implemented programs offering long-term support to survivors in Bosnia and Herzegovina between 2010 and 2016, strengthening the capacities of service providers, supporting the development of a legal framework that ensured free legal aid and adequate protective measures for victim witnesses, and awareness raising among the general public and decision makers about the issues faced by survivors.

Justice for survivors as a collective responsibility

In Rwanda, survivors of the 1994 genocide — many of whom were victims of sexual violence — have been actively involved in the Gacaca courts, a community justice system active from 2001 to 2012 that blended traditional conflict resolution mechanisms with modern needs for justice and reconciliation. Respected members of the community were elected to serve as judges and preside over the trials, hearing cases on all crimes related to the genocide and imposing sentences on a wide range of offenses, but emphasizing the role of confessions, repentance and forgiveness.

The system has been criticized for several reasons, including lack of legal expertise (presiding community members were not legal professionals), corruption, and lack of due process, but justice actors might learn from this model about ways to involve local communities in justice and reconciliation processes in order to empower them and build survivors’ agency.

As survivors reenter communities deeply changed, it’s also the community’s attitudes around sexual violence that need to change. Educating communities about the rights of survivors and how to support them is critical. In Liberia, the Women in Peacebuilding Network played a crucial role in ending the civil war and addressing sexual violence. This grassroots movement mobilized thousands of women across ethnic and religious groups to stage sit-ins and other forms of nonviolent protests to demand an end to Liberia’s civil wars. Their activism also played a vital role in the post-conflict transition, supporting civic education that included addressing stigma against sexual violence survivors. The movement also played a role in registering voters prior to the 2005 election of Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Africa’s first democratically elected woman president.

Not only do communities share ownership and responsibility for survivors, but nations do as well. Part of this process can be establishing specialized units to investigate crimes of sexual violence and hold perpetrators accountable, or passing legislation and policies that provide protections and services for survivors.

Governments have taken steps to address sexual violence within the context of armed conflict, including creating a special unit within the Attorney General's Office to investigate and prosecute cases of sexual violence in Ukraine and opening a macro case to investigate gender-based crimes including sexual and reproductive violence at the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) in Colombia. This demonstrates the importance of national ownership and responsibility in addressing these crimes.

In early March, a conference on restoring the rights of conflict-related sexual violence victims was held in Kyiv. Amidst the ongoing war, the conference was a testament to the resilience and determination of activists, legal experts, and survivors, the latter playing a central role in the event and demonstrating the critical importance of involving those most affected in conversations that aim to address and mitigate sexual violence crimes.

Conflict-related sexual violence was also the topic of discussion at a recent international conference in The Hague, gathering more than 40 national prosecutors to engage in issues such as case prioritization, survivors’ participation and protection, developing crime base evidence, as well as new challenges posed by these crimes in the context of terrorism, slavery, and trafficking.

These initiatives show the importance of coordinated international efforts and robust domestic policies and responses. But at the national level, there is still a pressing need both for improving legal frameworks as well as confronting the broader socio-political issues that allow these crimes to persist.

Finally, organizations established to address this violence should implement inclusive programming that affords services for all survivors regardless of gender, age, race, ethnicity, disability status, sexual orientation, or other factors, while addressing the specific needs of marginalized survivor groups. The Refugee Law Project in Uganda supports all survivors of sexual violence, recognizing that men can also be victims and face unique barriers in accessing services.

Media’s atonement for historical sensationalism

Given that sexual violence is such a difficult and often taboo topic, it might seem like an impossible task to accurately and respectfully represent it in media, especially when it comes to sexual violence in conflict. But a survivor-sensitive portrayal can be guided by the following key principles.

First and foremost, media coverage should avoid sensationalism and stereotypes, focusing instead on the factual impacts of violence on survivors. Media outlets have been known to apply a “soft pornography appeal,” providing unnecessary graphic details to attract viewership. Such media portrayal feeds into problematic narratives around sexual violence and risks retraumatizing survivors and misinforming the public.

Inclusive, intersectional, and contextual coverage is crucial. This means acknowledging the diverse experiences of survivors, including those from underrepresented groups or communities, and understanding the complexities at the intersection of various identities like as gender, race, social class, and disability. By doing so, media can avoid overlooking or misrepresenting the multifaceted nature of survivors’ experiences.

An intersectional analysis of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda reveals how gender, ethnicity, age, political affiliation and other identities played a role in the victimization of both Tutsi and Hutu women.

And instead of portraying survivors merely as passive victims, media narratives must give due credit to their strength and capacity to overcome adversity, which can contribute to changing the public perception and social norms around conflict-related sexual violence. Initiatives like the SEMA network (from Swahili, “speak out”) emphasize the courage of survivors to break the silence and stand up for their rights.

Ethical interviewing practices are another cornerstone of survivor-centric media representation. This involves prioritizing the safety and well-being of interviewees, obtaining informed consent, and respecting their wishes regarding anonymity and confidentiality. Such practices ensure that survivors’ rights and dignity are upheld during the reporting process.

It is imperative that journalism continues to learn and improve upon its coverage of topics of sexual violence responsibly. Media professionals should seek to learn from survivors and experts to refine their approach and ensure that their coverage does not inadvertently cause harm or perpetuate harmful stereotypes. Such training was recently provided to Kosovar journalists to equip them with techniques for gender and conflict-sensitive reporting.

Lastly, media would do well to highlight the support services and justice initiatives that are working to address the violence so that the public does not implicitly believe that such violence is inescapable, inevitable, or incurable. The public deserves to be informed of resources available to survivors, but media must also manage expectations regarding the outcomes of such initiatives. If the public is never given the full picture, then it can never be expected to understand it.

By focusing on these key principles, media can shape a more accurate, respectful, and empowering narrative around sexual violence in conflict.

When in doubt, listen to survivors. There is an unparalleled power in hearing directly from those who have endured the unspeakable. Their stories are not just narratives of pain and suffering but also of resilience, courage, and the pursuit of justice. Their guidance is a potent tool in efforts toward justice and healing, and those efforts must be firmly rooted in the experiences and wisdom of those who have lived through it.

Without such commitment, responses to sexual violence will fail to reflect the realities and needs of those affected, ultimately reinforcing these harmful norms and perpetuating the cycle of violence.