Reproductive violence, as distinct from the related issue of sexual violence, is yet to be truly ‘surfaced’ in international criminal law. Yet, this kind of violence has long been a feature of war, and is repugnant to the values that international criminal law protects. The Ongwen case, which commenced trial in the International Criminal Court in December 2016, is a step forward in this regard. Not only is this the first case in any international criminal court to include charges of ‘forced pregnancy’; it is also one of the only cases in which reproductive violence outside the context of genocide or ‘ethnic cleansing’ has been understood as a crime under international law. This article situates this landmark case is its historical contex, and raises some broader concerns about the limited response to reproductive violence in the development and enforcement of international criminal law. Based on an analysis of the law and practice of past and present international criminal courts, it shows that accountability for conflict-related reproductive violence has been patchy at best, and that there has been little recognition of the harms that such violence causes to individual victims, as distinct from the groups to which they ‘belong’. The article concludes by sketching out some steps to remedy these omissions, building on the progress made in the Ongwen case. Underlying the article is a view that reproductive autonomy is a distinct value from sexual autonomy, and that, where possible, conduct which offends this value should be punished as a separate crime.
Inspired by the themes of violence, masculinity and responsibility, this article investigates the visibility of male victims/survivors of conflict-related sexual violence in war. Despite the passing of UNSCR 1820 in 2008, the formulation of UN ACTION (United Nations Action Against Sexual Violence in Conflict), and the appointment of a United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General to lead policy and practice in this issue area, we argue here that male survivors/victims remain a marginal concern, which has, among other consequences, profound implications for the facilities that exist to support male victims/survivors during and after periods of active conflict. In the first section of the article, we provide an overview of the contemporary academic literature on rape in war, not only to act as the foundation for the analytical work that follows but also to illustrate the argument that male survivors/victims of sexualised violence in war are near-invisible in the majority of literature on this topic. Second, we turn our analytical lens to the policy environment charged with addressing sexualised violence in conflict. Through a discourse analysis focussed on the website of UN ACTION (www.stoprapenow.org), we demonstrate that this lack of vision in academic work maps directly to a lack of visibility in the policy arena. The third section of the article explores the
This chapter examines the limited attention given to prevention within Australian policy responses to sexual assault and harassment in university settings. It draws on the findings of Change the Course: National Report on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment at Australian Universities, released by the Australian Human Rights Commission in 2017. The chapter first describes the historical and political context for the survey, which was initiated in response to the problem of sexual violence in Australian campuses. It then considers the initial steps taken following the release of the survey with the goal of strengthening Australian university responses to sexual harassment and assault. It also discusses recent developments from universities with regard to the problem of sexual violence and some of the key challenges that need to be addressed. Finally, it suggests a long-term approach to address sexual assault and harassment that shifts the focus from risk management to harm prevention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.