Join 100+ global actors this September in The Hague for a two-day conference this September to advance feminist, intersectional justice in international criminal law.
📋 Register here: https://forms.office.com/e/6EsxQAfTCF
In recent years, a well-funded, well-organised anti-gender movement has gained momentum globally, undermining gender equality efforts by spreading misinformation, influencing policies, and restricting rights, creating a significant challenge for practitioners and institutions advocating for inclusive justice.
The impact of the anti-gender movement can be clearly seen in legislative and policy reform reversing, limiting and/or slowing progress towards gender equality around the world. The anti-gender movement is not new but has recently gathered pace and intensity in the Global North. It is recognised that activists in the Global South have long-confronted deeply entrenched opposition from the anti-gender movement and have vital experience and critical strategies to share. There is escalating global hostility on gender, including on specific issues such as LGBTQIA+ rights, sexual and reproductive health, and diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), and the prevailing narrative appears to be one that threatens to entrench inequality worldwide.
There have also been impacts at an operational level within justice and accountability institutions. Preliminary information suggests there is a risk of pressure to a) reduce focus or deprioritise investigation into gendered crimes or human rights violations which predominantly affect women or girls, and b) to remove gender-competent and intersectional approaches from analysis of crimes and violations, writ large. There are also instances of ‘pre-emptive compliance’ – i.e. individuals or institutions scaling back work on gender or gendered issues in anticipation of formal direction to do so or due to an impression that gender analysis is no longer a requirement. These pressures coincide with increasing direct institutional challenges: the US has pressured UNICEF and UN Women to end promotion of DEI, and gender ideology, while other states have also announced significant cuts to funding for gender programming within the UN system.
These challenges come at a critical time for the meaningful incorporation of gender into justice and accountability initiatives. In Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine and Sudan, justice facilitation opportunities are emerging now – future gender justice outcomes will be undermined and diminished unless concrete steps are taken soon to prioritise gender where these opportunities arise.
With this in mind, the Gender Justice Practitioner Hub has launched a series of online discussions that are bringing practitioners together to explore the impact of this movement, with a view toward developing tools, support mechanisms, and strategies for countering these challenges. These conversations will also help shape this year’s Gender and International Criminal Law Conference, which is expected to take place in October 2025.
As we mark International Women’s Day 2025, we do so in a year already shaped by turbulence, conflict, and renewed threats to gender justice. Increased armed conflict, political instability, retraction of crucial humanitarian aid, and restrictions on fundamental human rights have reinforced a sobering message: progress is neither linear nor guaranteed. Now more than ever legal practitioners, including investigators, prosecutors ,and human rights defenders, play a vital role in fighting for justice, challenging impunity, and ensuring that survivors’ voices are centred.
Globally, legal practitioners have accrued extensive knowledge and developed critical experience in implementing innovative strategies to secure justice for core international crimes. Practitioners have secured landmark legal judgments, demonstrating that justice can be achieved for women and girls. For example, in 2023, six members of Shanti Mohila—an informal network of Rohingya women displaced from Myanmar during the 2017 ‘clearance operations,’ who now champion international justice for their community in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh—travelled to Argentina to provide witness testimony in the universal jurisdiction case against Myanmar government officials for the crime of genocide and crimes against humanity. In February 2025, a federal criminal court in Buenos Aires ordered arrest warrants against 25 Myanmar officials for genocide and crimes against humanity.
Practitioners have also been quick to learn from instances where gendered impacts were overlooked, or where survivors could have been better involved, such as the 2024 failure to secure convictions for any of the gender-based crimes, including gender persecution, charged against Al Hassan Ag Abdoul Aziz Ag Mohamed Ag Mahmoud (‘Al Hassan’) at the International Criminal Court.
Utilising this knowledge will help us overcome the discriminatory hierarchies that prevent equal and effective access to justice for women, girls and other groups affected by gender discrimination. Practitioners at all levels in all regions must have access to the tools and resources they need to effectively leverage this expertise and advance gender justice around the world.
Further, broader coordination and solidarity amongst all practitioners must be enhanced. All too often, those investigating and prosecuting gendered violations within accountability institutions are siloed or sidelined. There is a pressing need for spaces where practitioners can come together, share their experiences, discuss current challenges, and think creatively about how best to champion gender justice.
It is with this gap in mind that the Gender Justice Practitioner Hub (GJP Hub) was created. The GJP Hub is committed to fostering collaboration, sharing resources, and supporting those at the forefront of the fight for justice. This year, the GJP Hub will work closely with practitioners the world over – to support their work and strengthen gender justice outcomes.
Women around the world face a rising tide of opposition as they fight tirelessly for their fundamental rights and for an end to impunity for international crimes. But with the right knowledge, networks, and support, practitioners and survivors can overcome this and secure a more just and equal society for us all.
This International Women’s Day serves as a poignant reminder that that justice is never guaranteed, and we all play an important part in the fight.
Over 2023 and 2024 (Phase One), Legal Action Worldwide, with the support of the Australian Department for Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), carried out extensive research and consultation, engaging with more than 820 individuals across 9 roundtables, workshops and conferences to assess the level of demand for the GJP Hub, and to clarify the focus and scope of its mandate. The overarching message was clear – there was huge enthusiasm for the establishment of the GJP Hub to carry out three essential roles:
 |
To act as a collective, accessible repository for gender justice precedents, tools and information for practitioners. |
|
To provide opportunities and fora for practitioners to come together to think creatively about gender justice, to network, to identify common problems and innovative solutions. |
|
To act as a helpdesk, providing justice practitioners with tailored solutions to specific challenges in securing high-quality gender justice outcomes, from technical assistance, to connection, mentorship and support by leveraging existing expertise. |
You can read the Phase One report setting out all of the findings of this extensive research initiative here.
The Gender Justice Practitioner Hub was launched at a side event to the 2024 Assembly of State Parties on 5 December 2024. The Keynote remarks were provided by Michelle Jarvis, Deputy Head of the IIIM Syria. Her remarks, in full are below:
Three weeks ago, I was standing in front of a lecture room full of students at Exeter Law School in the UK. My brief was to talk to them about ‘innovations and aspirations’ in international criminal law. A chance to reflect back over 24 years working as a practitioner at the coalface of developments in modern international criminal law.
Standing there in front of the next generation brought into sharp focus the question of what our aspirations for justice should be? What do we want to leave behind to the generations that will follow? And that question cut particularly deep for me because my daughter – now a student at Exeter – was in the audience. What should I tell them – what should I tell her – about our future aspirations?
The answer is that I want us to leave behind a world where there is ‘justice for all’. But I have seen in my 24 years of ICL practice, and even longer focusing on issues concerning gender and conflict, that the dominant systems on which our world is built are not fit for this purpose. They deter, rather than deliver, our inclusive justice aspiration.
I have seen this over and over again in the work that I’ve done on accountability processes for the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and now for Syria. And the problem is much broader than that. We are seeing the impact of these dysfunctional systems play out in the news headlines every day, in ever increasing ways. Our systems of:
But let’s focus on the issue of gender discrimination. I have seen up close how structural gender discrimination drives violence during conflict. It then operates to obscure the voices and experiences of victims and survivors and block their access to justice.
Just in the relatively narrow arc of my own career, I’ve seen a steady succession of sign-posts marking the systemic gender justice obstacles. To recount just a few:
1996: I was a researcher at the University of Adelaide working on a project examining the distinctive impact of conflict on women. And the extent to which International Law responds… or does not respond. I remember the push back that we got about the very idea that men and women experience conflict differently. There was also the immense challenge of finding any information about the specific issues that affect women during conflict. Their voices and experiences were virtually erased from the history books.
1997: I was an intern at the ICTY assisting Patti Sellers in her role as Legal Advisor for Gender Issues with an assignment for the Akayesu case before the ICTR. The Akayesu indictment did not initially include any charges of sexual violence. The trial started, and women called to testify started describing rapes during the genocide. The Presiding Judge adjourned the trial and told the Prosecutor assess whether to amend the indictment. My task was to research whether it was possible to charge rape as genocide. Back then, this was an extremely novel idea and very controversial. But surely there could be no dispute that rape met the definition of serious bodily and mental harm, part of the actus reus of genocide? So long as it was carried out with the same genocidal intent as the killings? But there was intense pushback about applying a gender perspective to the crime of genocide, with fears expressed that it would ‘water down’ the seriousness of the crime.
Late 1990s and early 2000s: the first Srebrenica prosecution at the ICTY and the near failure to include the forcible transfer component of the case. The highly gendered events in Srebrenica are now well known: over 7,000 men and boys slaughtered en masse. Up to 25 thousand women and children forcibly transferred out of the Srebrenica enclave. Initially, the Prosecution considered only investigating the killing, and omitting the forcible transfer from the planned Srebrenica case file. This only changed by a twist of fate. Today, we know it was by looking at the combined impact of the killings and forcible transfer, that the picture of genocide was accurately revealed before the ICTY.
The mid-2000’s: a duo of trial judgements from the ICTY examining sexual violence crimes in Kovoso that artificially isolated sexual violence out from other violent discriminatory acts and imposed higher evidentiary standards. These problematic precedents were ultimately corrected on appeal, but not without significant internal pushback about the appropriateness of appealing.
The last years of the ICTY’s work: for me, many hours spent meeting with the Mothers of Srebrenica. These were women who had lost male family members – some as many as 17—during the genocide in Srebrenica. The traumatic impact was profound. But it was also incredibly humbling to see their resilience. And their expertise! Some of them knew as much about the technicalities of the proceedings at the ICTY as any of our lawyers. For me, it was an unprecedented window into the gendered impact of conflict and the importance of hearing the voices of those disadvantaged by gender discrimination. Yet, less than 13 % of witnesses at ICTY were women.
2017: and the start of my work at the International Impartial and Independent Mechanism for Syria – the IIIM. The rare opportunity to build a gender-sensitive institution from the ground up and to integrate a gender analysis as part of the core daily work of the Mechanism. But we were confronted by the paucity of practical tools and precedents to guide us, the need to craft everything from scratch, and the absence of effective resources to help navigate the significant change management aspects of the process.
2018: The intensification of the IIIM’s two-way dialogue with affected community civil society actors and the stark under-representation of women as well as the degree of effort constantly required to address this.
Throughout the IIIM’s case work: the paucity of statements from women and girls in the documentation of crimes in Syria that we collected from other justice actors. For example, numerous cases of chemical weapons have been documented in Syria. Women and girls were present in large numbers among the civilian victims of these attacks, but their experiences were not reflected in the documentation. And while the IIIM has committed to filling these gendered evidentiary gaps, there are pervasive structural obstacles to surfacing the evidence, including cultural norms that keep women out of public places and reduce their access to resources and official documentation.
And throughout all of this, there is the situation of persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities – whose experiences have rarely been effectively addressed by accountability actors. In the context of Syria, even civil society actors can be reluctant to focus on these issues due to fear of retribution.
That is just a snapshot of what I’ve experienced through my engagement with justice processes. Our collective list of obstacles confronted is much, much longer.
I have also seen what a complicated project it is to address these ingrained structural factors and deliver more inclusive justice. These discriminatory structures operate both within the affected communities – and among us as accountability actors.
We have to be honest. We have barely begun to recognize the importance of a comprehensive intersectional gender analysis in ICL. For many, gender, if thought of at all, still equates with interviewing sexual violence victims.
We have so many important new frontiers still to address. To name just a few:
The overall picture is one of narrow and fragmented approaches. Each new accountability mandate struggles to address the same biased and exclusionary practices all over again. Our progress is fragile and it the risk of regression is alarming.
The need for a more sustained, structural solution, has sparked the idea for the Gender Justice Practitioner Hub. In very simple terms, the aim of the Hub is to:
I could see, from my own limited vantage point in this work over many years, the compelling need for a vehicle to connect and support practitioners across different justice processes and over time.
But over the past 18 months during the scoping phase for the Hub, I’ve been stunned by the depth of the sentiment across different regions of the world for the Hub to play a far more ambitious role. Calls for the Hub:
Whether the Hub can make a contribution to such an audacious vision remains to be seen – but I think we should try. As I told the students at Exeter University, nothing that we have delivered as part of the international justice project over the past 30 years has been easy – most of it has seemed impossible at the beginning.
The path forward is messy, unclear and will no doubt be filled with missteps. But in the words of Franklin Roosevelt, as more recently popularized by Brené Brown. And paraphrased by me… because the original was not exactly gender inclusive.
It is not the critic who counts; not the one who points out how the strong stumble, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to those actually in the arena; who strive valiantly; who err, who come up short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who do actually strive to do the deeds; who at the best know in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if they fail, at least fail while daring greatly.
So my invitation to all of you tonight is to step into the arena with us and let’s see what we can collectively achieve.
You have come here tonight with many different backgrounds, functions and perspectives on gender justice. We need help from you all:
Like the flutter of the proverbial butterfly’s wings, we never know what small action could trigger cascading change towards a world where we truly have justice for all.
Side event to the 23rd Session of the International Criminal Court Assembly of State Parties.
Facilitated by Legal Action Worldwide. Sponsored by the Embassy of Australia in The Hague.
On 5 December 2024, coinciding with the Assembly of State Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Gender Justice Practitioner (GJP) Hub was formally launched at the Australian Ambassador’s Residence in The Hague (Tobias Asserlaan 6, The Hague, The Netherlands. The event was organised by Legal Action Worldwide and the Embassy of Australia to the Netherlands, with the generous support of Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).
The Gender Justice Practitioner Hub (The GJP Hub) is founded to foster collaboration, strengthen coordination and facilitate experience-sharing amongst practitioners all over the world to ensure better gender justice outcomes for survivors of core international crimes.
At the launch event, the findings from two years of research and consultation about the GJP Hub idea and the next steps for the its establishment will be presented. An esteemed panel of practitioners will outline the critical impact that the GJP Hub will have on their work securing gender justice. Participants will find out more about the work of the GJP Hub and about how they can get more involved.
The GJP Hub
In recent decades, the many obstacles to securing meaningful gender justice in accountability processes for core international crimes (particularly war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide) have become increasingly apparent. The discriminatory gender hierarchy operates to prevent equal and effective access to justice for certain groups and individuals who are disadvantaged due to constructed gender norms. While the issue of conflict-related sexual violence has become more visible, and various initiatives have been undertaken to address it, effective justice is still rarely achieved for sexual violence victims. The many other aspects of gender justice beyond sexual violence crimes, and the specific barriers to achieving them, remain under-recognised and seldom addressed in accountability processes.
All too often, attempts to secure accountability for gendered crimes are fettered by justice systems ill-equipped to meaningfully address these crimes. With each new accountability process undertaken, there is a risk of the same mistakes and omissions being repeated.
These difficulties are not insurmountable. There are a number of landmark legal developments and successes from national, regional and international courts around the world that demonstrate that more effective gender justice can be achieved. Experts with decades of relevant experience exist across multiple contexts. It is critical that these experiences are now leveraged. The conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, Gaza, and Myanmar, among others, are recent examples in a long series of situations underscoring the urgent need for more effective and coordinated approaches to channelling comprehensive gender expertise into accountability processes from the outset.
The establishment of the GJP Hub is a practical step towards addressing these challenges and will help to promote more gender-just accountability processes in the future.
Over the past 24 months Legal Action Worldwide, with the support of DFAT, has undertaken extensive research and consultation, engaging with more than 820 individuals across 9 roundtables, workshops and conferences to assess the level of demand for the GJP Hub and to clarify the focus and scope of its mandate. The overarching message was clear: there was huge enthusiasm for the establishment of the GJP Hub to carry out three essential roles:
The GJP Hub will champion core values including an intersectional, feminist, decolonial approach to gender and recognise that gender justice and peace are closely interlinked.
On 26 June 2024, a Gender Justice Practitioner Hub regional roundtable took place in Nairobi, Kenya. Participants highlighted the need to define “gender justice” and address challenges such as limited legal access, lack of representation, and legislative gaps. Proposed activities for the Hub include creating a resource centre, supporting documentation of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV), and facilitating regional roundtables. Participants underscore the need to include a broad range of practitioners, including survivors and judicial officers.
Recommendations outlined how the GJP Hub could support development of domestic legal frameworks, enhanced capacity building, and fostering collaboration with stakeholders like UN Women and civil society organisations. Specific suggestions included ensuring the GJP Hub operates effectively within national jurisdictions, advocating for sufficient laws, and promoting accountability for core international crimes. Enhancing the environment for human rights defenders in the military, resource sharing, and lobbying governments for political will were also emphasised. Additionally, influencing prosecutorial strategies to include gender-based crimes in charges was recommended. The work of South Africa’s Thuthuzela Care Centres were highlighted as a best practice, offering comprehensive services to reduce secondary victimisation and support successful prosecutions.
On 2 May 2024, Legal Action Worldwide and the Embassy of Australia in Colombia facilitated a Gender Justice Practitioner Hub roundtable in Bogotá, Colombia. More than 30 representatives from civil society, academia, UN agencies and executive and judicial state institutions joined to gather their input and perspectives as experts in gender justice efforts in the region.
Recognising the decades of consolidated expertise in the region in the investigation, prosecution, and punishment of gender-based crimes in contexts of armed conflict, dictatorships, and political repression, participants underscored the need for a space for practitioners to safely come together, coordinate and collaborate. Roundtable participants highlighted the importance that the Hub prioritises access and communication of the vast amount of information, resources, learnings, jurisprudence, and legal frameworks that is already produced and available in the region. Ideas around the functioning of the Hub were also considered. Furthermore, participants supported the idea that the Hub could integrate interdisciplinary tools, as the experience in Latin America has shown that the combination of knowledge and support beyond legal professionals have proved successful in key landmark decisions on gendered crimes.
On 24 April 2024, LAW and the Permanent Mission of Australia to the United Nations facilitated a Gender Justice Practitioner Hub roundtable in Geneva, Switzerland. 30 representatives from civil society, member states and key UN mechanisms, commissions of inquiry and fact-finding bodies joined to hear feedback from previous roundtables and provide input on the Hub initiative.
Recognising the growing threat to movements seeking gender justice, participants underscored the need for a space for practitioners to safely come together, coordinate and collaborate, echoing a clear finding from previous roundtables. The role of a future Hub as a central repository was also considered. Roundtable participants highlighted the need for precedent, policy and best practice to be curated and made accessible for a wide range of practitioners.
Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, Legal Action Worldwide, Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies, UN Women, the Australian Embassy in The Hague and the International Gender Champions Network, were very pleased to co-host the Gender and International Criminal Law conference on 16-17 January 2024 in The Hague.
The 2-day conference convened 200+ key gender justice actors to share knowledge, inspire practical solutions, and renew energy to inform the future of a more equitable International Criminal Law field.
The impetus for the conference was the publication of the comprehensive book Gender and International Criminal Law in July 2022 by Oxford University Press, edited by Indira Rosenthal, Valerie Oosterveld, and Susana SáCouto, and a new initiative to establish a Gender Justice Practitioner Hub (GJP Hub) to support and connect practitioners involved in securing gender justice for core.
You can find the full program of the conference here.
Please find the materials presented or referred to at the 2 day conference below:
Please find the recordings of the 2 days of the conference at these links:
Gender and ICL conference Day 1
Gender and ICL conference Day 2
This conference was made possible with the support of the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).
