What would it take to create a Crimes Against Humanity treaty that truly addresses sexual and gender-based crimes?

Co-sponsored by Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, the UK Government, the Global Justice Center, Washington University School of Law, Physicians for Human Rights, the Emergent Justice Collective, TRIAL International, Fédération Internationale pour les Droits Humains (FIDH), the Asia Justice Collective, and the UCLA Promise Institute., this panel unpacked key proposals for the treaty, including recognizing crimes like gender apartheid, reproductive violence, and forced marriage. The speakers also explored the need for a gender audit of the draft treaty and survivor-centered provisions to ensure justice systems better serve victims.

The discussion covered key topics such as:

Reproductive Violence: Addressing gaps in legal protections and advancing proposals for inclusive definitions.

Gender Apartheid: Translating the lived realities of women, particularly in Afghanistan, into legal recognition.

Forced Marriage: The journey from a groundbreaking concept to its integration into international law.

The Slave Trade as a Feminist Concern: Recognizing its connection to gender-based violence and systemic oppression.

Survivor-Centered Justice: Ensuring survivors have access to holistic support, justice, and reparations.

🗣️ Interventions

Leila Sadat, Washington University School of Law – The Process and Forced Marriage Proposals.

“When I worked at the Office of the Prosecutor under Fatou Bensouda, someone said “If you think you’re too small to make a difference, you haven’t spent a night with a mosquito.””

Leila Sadat emphasized the need to complement existing vertical mechanisms for addressing crimes against humanity with a horizontal framework that fosters cooperation and trust among states to prevent and punish these crimes. She highlighted the significant milestone of the UN General Assembly’s adoption of a consensus resolution on December 4, 2024, following years of advocacy and a two-year preparatory process.

Reflecting on the journey, Leila noted that while the four-year timeline ahead might seem lengthy, after 16 years of work, it feels like substantial progress has been made. She praised the feminist and inclusive processes that revitalized the treaty negotiations and played pivotal roles in fostering collaboration and transparency.

Leila also highlighted the opportunity to modernize the treaty by incorporating both well-established norms and emerging concepts like gender apartheid, ensuring it addresses contemporary realities and strengthens the global framework for justice.

Akila Radhakrishnan, Atlantic Council – Gender Apartheid

I think it’s important to start the conversation by not talking about the law but the fact that [gender aparthied] is about something that translates the calls and the lived realities of women, particularly in Afghanistan, into law.

Akila Radakrishnan highlighted that the concept of gender apartheid goes beyond legal definitions – it seeks to translate the lived realities of women, particularly in Afghanistan, into actionable legal frameworks. Unlike past approaches that brought women’s perspectives into the conversation only at later stages, these discussions have sought to center their voices from the outset.

She explained that gender apartheid, like racial apartheid, systematically denies oppressed groups access to work, education, healthcare, justice, political power, and basic freedoms, stripping them of autonomy and personhood. These regimes are intentionally designed to maintain dominance, creating self-perpetuating systems of governance that control every aspect of political, economic, and social life. By doing so, they prevent the oppressed from organizing to challenge their subjugation, while enabling the dominant group to benefit from their exploitation.

This sweeping and dystopian system of oppression underscores the urgency of codifying gender apartheid as a distinct crime under international law.

Alexandra Lily Kather, Emergent Justice Collective – The Slave Trade.

The draft articles are an invitation and possibility for reconsidering who makes international law, where it is being made, and what concerns can be put forward that historically and even presently haven’t been able to take center stage.

Alexandra Lily Kather emphasized the critical importance of addressing the slave trade as a feminist issue within the framework of international law. While often overlooked in gender justice discussions, the slave trade frequently serves as a precursor to severe gender-based crimes, including sexual violence, impacting individuals across all ages and genders.

They highlighted examples from the experiences of Yazidis in Iraq and Syria, migrants in Libya and Sudan, and ethnic minorities in Ethiopia, illustrating the far-reaching impacts of the slave trade. Legally, the slave trade refers to the intent to reduce individuals into slavery or transfer them out of such conditions. Unlike the crime of enslavement, it does not require the actual enslavement of victims, making its recognition essential for broader accountability.

Lily praised the recent policy on slavery crimes launched by the Office of the Prosecutor, which incorporates intersectional and survivor-centered perspectives, and noted the growing momentum for multilateral action. For example, Sierra Leone has led efforts to include the slave trade as an enumerated crime in the draft Crimes Against Humanity articles, as well as amendments to the Rome Statute, with support from the African Group and other regions.

To conclude, Lily underscored that the slave trade is not only a feminist concern but also a pressing issue for the Global South. Addressing this crime challenges us to rethink who drives international lawmaking, where it happens, and whose voices are centered. They called for sustained advocacy to elevate these historically marginalized concerns on the global stage.

Ashita Alag, Global Justice Center – Reproductive Violence and Gender Audit.

Feminists have always said that neutral has always equaled patriarchal, that neutral provisions are ways for existing structures of oppression to find pockets to come up and continue to oppress. Neutral provisions are not really neutral; they are tools in the hands of patriarchy, colonialism, and racism to continue empowering themselves.

Ashita Alag, Legal Adviser at the Global Justice Center, highlighted the critical need to address reproductive violence in the Crimes Against Humanity treaty. Defined as violence that interferes with reproductive autonomy or targets individuals based on their actual or perceived reproductive capacity, reproductive violence is not an abstract concept but a pervasive and tangible harm with severe, lifelong consequences. Examples include forced pregnancies, forced contraception, forced abortion, and forced or denied breastfeeding.

Currently, only forced pregnancy and forced sterilization are explicitly recognized under the Rome Statute and the draft articles. Ashita emphasized that this narrow framework inadequately addresses other forms of reproductive violence, which often must be categorized as either sexual violence or other inhumane acts—both insufficient for capturing the specific harm and denying victims full recognition and accountability.

To advance protections for reproductive autonomy, Ashita proposed three key amendments:

1. Explicitly Include Reproductive Violence: Amend draft Article 2 to include “sexual or reproductive violence,” signaling clear international condemnation and ensuring better documentation, accountability, and justice.
2. Adopt Inclusive Language: Update the definition of forced pregnancy to include “women, girls, or any other person,” reflecting the reality that pregnancy impacts trans men, non-binary individuals, and intersex people.
3. Remove Superfluous Clauses: Eliminate the legally unnecessary clause on national laws relating to pregnancy, which risks confusion and undermines clarity in enforcement.

Ashita underscored the importance of these changes for achieving normative impact, practical utility, and efficiency in criminal law, enabling more effective support for survivors and accountability for perpetrators. These proposals would ensure the treaty addresses reproductive violence comprehensively and inclusively.

Uliana Poltavets, Physicians for Human Rights – Survivor-centered Approaches.

Uliana Poltavets, from Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), emphasized the importance of a survivor-centered approach in addressing crimes against humanity, drawing on the experiences of survivors in Ukraine during the Russian invasion. Over 326 cases of conflict-related sexual violence have been documented, highlighting the calculated use of terror to subjugate communities.

Survivors consistently emphasize the need for safety, acknowledgment, support systems, and access to justice without retraumatization. Uliana called for trauma-informed care, culturally sensitive support, and holistic systems that include healthcare and economic opportunities.

She highlighted the importance of documenting crimes to support prosecutions and praised Ukraine’s interim reparations for over 300 survivors, with more than 500 applications submitted. Stressing that this treaty is more than a legal framework, Uliana described it as a promise to survivors for recognition, justice, and meaningful support.

Hannah Garry, UCLA – Reflections on the path forward.

Hannah Gary, Executive Director of the Promise Institute for Human Rights at UCLA, shared insights on advancing gender justice through greater collaboration between states and civil society organizations (CSOs). Drawing on her extensive experience in international criminal law, she emphasized the need for states to provide broader access to CSOs, particularly survivor-led and grassroots groups, in treaty negotiations. She also urged states to include gender-diverse delegations, champion progressive gender justice proposals, and allocate resources to support survivor-centered initiatives.

Hannah highlighted opportunities for CSOs in 2025 to form networks, refine proposals, and collaborate with supportive states to influence the treaty’s development. She encouraged civil society to adopt feminist and inclusive processes, learn from past efforts like the Women’s Caucus during the Rome Statute negotiations, and advocate boldly for comprehensive gender justice. Hannah closed by underscoring that the treaty offers a unique moment to address historical gaps, embrace emerging norms like gender apartheid, and ensure justice frameworks meet the challenges of the 21st century.

This event provided a platform to share critical insights and recommendations on how to make the treaty inclusive, survivor-centered, and effective in addressing systemic injustices.

🎥 Watch the full recording of the panel to revisit key insights.