Sexualized Violence in war. Survival comes first, what comes after?

Conflict-related sexualized violence (CRSV) is not an exception in war, it is a constant. Documented in almost every armed conflict throughout history to this day, it remains one of the most underreported and taboo consequences of war. Rape is not a random by-product of conflict, it is a weapon destroying individuals, women, men, children, families, and entire communities. 

What does it take to turn legal recognition into lived reality, including access to psychosocial support and freedom from stigma – and what can be learned from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo to strengthen the response for Ukraine's survivors, now, while the conflict and its consequences are still shaping policy?

Lina Kushch, a journalist, civic activist, First Secretary of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU), and a board member of the NGO “Numo, Sisters!”

You are documenting conflict-related sexualized violence in an ongoing conflict, what particular obstacles does this create for survivors seeking support when war is simultaneously ongoing and state structures are under pressure?

One of the main challenges is that both the full-scale war and the violence are still ongoing. Many women who have experienced captivity, torture, or conflict-related sexualized violence do not feel safe, as they live under shelling in frontline areas, in occupied territories, or have lost their sources of income, while also living in fear for relatives who remain under occupation. In such conditions, seeking psychological support or documenting crimes is often not the first priority. Survival comes first.

Secondly, access to medical care, legal assistance, and trauma-informed psychological support remains uneven due to the overburdening of state institutions.

Thirdly, some survivors are afraid to report crimes due to stigma, fear for their relatives, or distrust in law enforcement bodies. It also happens that women released from captivity do not identify themselves as survivors of conflict-related sexualized violence, as they associate the term only with rape, although CRSV covers a much broader spectrum of crimes.

As a survivor-led organization, “Numo, Sisters!” tries to fill these gaps through peer-to-peer support and personalized accompaniment of women released from Russian captivity. We literally accompany women from institution to institution in order to create a safe environment for survivors.

The Bardina Law of 2024 is the first of its kind to regulate reparations during an active war. What is already working in practice, and where has implementation so far fallen short of expectations?

We established our organization after the law has already been adopted. However, the head of “Nymo,Sisters!”, Lyudmila Huseinova, was among those who actively advocated for its adoption and played a key role in promoting it. The most important achievement of the law is that Ukraine has officially recognized for the first time that survivors of conflict-related sexualized violence are entitled to urgent interim reparations even before the end of the war and without waiting for final court decisions. This is a very important shift.

Another positive step is the introduction of a survivor-centered and gender-sensitive approach in communication with survivors. According to members of our organization, the way police and prosecutors communicate has significantly improved.

However, many provisions of the law remain declarative, as the government has not yet developed the necessary secondary legislation. To this day, no one in Ukraine has been officially granted the legal status of a CRSV survivor, which is critically needed for civilian women and men who experienced torture in detention facilities in occupied territories or in Russia. Without this status, they remain ordinary citizens without access to specific rights or benefits.

The payment of urgent interim reparations was a pilot project of the Global Survivors Fund and the Ukrainian government a year ago. At that time, more than 630 survivors received support. However, today there is no funding for continued payments, which is deeply concerning for us as a survivor-led organization, as assistance must be timely and continuous.

Beyond financial compensation, the most pressing issue for survivors is housing. There is a severe shortage of social housing in Ukrainian communities, while many survivors have lost their homes due to occupation or destruction during hostilities. Medical care, housing, education, and rehabilitation – both for women and their children, who are also affected after years of separation from their mothers – all require sustainable funding and coordination, which we currently do not see.

As a journalist and activist, you work at the intersection of public communication and survivor support. How do you prevent media coverage of CRSV from re-traumatizing survivors rather than benefiting them?

The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine organized a series of trainings for 120 journalists on reporting CRSV cases. This was the first time the trainer was a survivor herself who had spent three years in a Russian prison – Lyudmila Huseinova. We trained journalists to conduct interviews in line with the Murad Code and found that most media outlets were not prepared to cover such a complex topic. These women were virtually invisible in the media, even in regions affected by Russian occupation. 

Today, the situation has changed. Journalists often approach our organization to request meetings with survivors, and we help facilitate these interviews, but we never pressure women to speak publicly. Unfortunately, we have also witnessed negative cases where unprofessional journalism led to the exposure of personal data or caused survivors to require psychological support. At the same time, there are now powerful, in-depth stories on CRSV, some of which have received professional awards.

Participation in interviews, filming, or advocacy campaigns is always voluntary. Women decide what they are ready to share and when. The right to remain silent or to stop an interview at any moment is also a form of regaining control over one’s life.

Dr. Feride Rushiti,  medical doctor, human rights activist, Executive Director of the Kosova Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims (KRCT), Nobel Peace Prize Nomination 2025

In Kosovo, it took nearly two decades from the end of the war to the practical implementation of survivor status. What were the decisive obstacles, and what factors ultimately enabled the breakthrough?

The greatest obstacle was silence, a silence created by stigma, fear, shame, and the lack of institutional courage to address wartime sexualized violence openly. Survivors were often isolated, afraid of rejection by their families or communities, and many carried their trauma alone for years. Society was not ready to listen, and institutions were not ready to act. Another challenge was political hesitation. Wartime sexualized violence was treated as a sensitive issue connected to the legacy of war, and for many years survivors remained invisible in public policies and legal frameworks. There was also a lack of trust from survivors toward institutions, because they feared retraumatization and exposure. What ultimately enabled the breakthrough was the resilience and courage of survivors themselves. Their voices, even when expressed quietly and privately, pushed us forward. At KRCT, we worked for many years alongside survivors, building trust step by step, advocating nationally and internationally, and insisting that justice must include recognition and rehabilitation. The support of civil society, women activists, international partners, and certain political leaders who showed empathy and commitment also played an important role. The moment society began to understand that survivors are not victims of shame, but survivors of a crime committed against them, change became possible. Recognition was not only a legal achievement , it was a moral acknowledgment of their suffering and dignity. 

2. Rehabilitation means more than legal recognition: which forms of psychosocial support have proven particularly effective in your many years of work in enabling survivors to live a life free from stigmatization?

Legal recognition is important, but healing begins when survivors feel safe, heard, and respected as human beings. Trauma caused by wartime sexualized violence affects every dimension of life, emotional, social, physical, and economic. That is why rehabilitation must be holistic. One of the most effective approaches has been long-term trauma-informed psychosocial support. Survivors need spaces where they can speak without fear of judgment. Individual therapy, group therapy, and peer support groups have helped many women understand that they are not alone. Economic empowerment has also been essential. When survivors gain financial independence through vocational training, employment opportunities, or small business support, they regain confidence and control over their lives. Dignity is deeply connected to the ability to make choices for oneself and one’s family. Equally important has been community awareness. We cannot ask survivors to heal while society continues to stigmatize them. Through education, storytelling, art, advocacy, and public dialogue, we have tried to change the narrative, from shame and silence to dignity and resilience. What I have learned over the years is that healing does not happen in one moment. It is a journey. Sometimes the most powerful support is simply being present, listening, and reminding survivors that what happened to them does not define their worth

3. Since 2023, Kosovo has observed April 14th as a national day of remembrance for survivors. What social impact does such symbolic recognition have, and where are its limits?

Symbolic recognition matters deeply because it tells survivors: “We see you. We acknowledge your pain. You are part of our collective memory.” For many survivors, being publicly recognized by their country is something they never imagined possible. The National Day of Remembrance helps break decades of silence. It creates space for public discussion, education, and empathy, especially for younger generations who did not experience the war directly. It also sends a message that wartime sexualized violence is not a private shame, but a serious violation of human rights and a crime of war. At the same time, symbolism alone is not enough. Commemorations must be accompanied by concrete action. Survivors still need sustained access to healthcare, psychological support, economic opportunities, justice, and social inclusion. Many continue to live with trauma, poverty, and discrimination. The true measure of remembrance is not only what we say once a year, but how we treat survivors every day. For me, April 14th is important because it transforms memory into responsibility. It reminds society that healing and justice are ongoing processes  and that survivors deserve not only recognition, but dignity, support, and equal opportunities throughout their lives.

Ajna Mahmić Ćatić, legal Expert, TRIAL International, Bosnia and Herzegovina

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, access to compensation still depends to this day on which entity a person lives in. How do you assess this patchwork legally, and what concrete consequences does it have for survivors in their daily lives?

A major challenge in Bosnia and Herzegovina is the absence of a unified legal framework regulating the rights and status of survivors of conflict-related sexualized violence. The fragmented system has created unequal access to rights, inconsistent standards for recognising victim status, and disparities in financial and social support across different parts of the country. Procedural barriers, lack of information, and social stigma have further discouraged survivors from seeking recognition and assistance. For more than a decade, civil society organisations have advocated for a comprehensive state-level law that would regulate these issues in a uniform and non-discriminatory way. However, three attempts to adopt such legislation have failed. As a result, current efforts focus on improving existing laws and strengthening their implementation. At the same time, we continuously monitor the political landscape in Bosnia and Herzegovina to identify opportunities for advancing survivor protection and support. Where institutional assistance is insufficient, we rely on alternative and hybrid support models through civil society organisations to ensure that survivors access to support does not depend solely on political will or institutional readiness.

The prosecution of perpetrators and the support of survivors often operate in parallel, poorly connected systems. How can criminal accountability and survivor-centered care be better thought of together?

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, criminal accountability and survivor support have largely developed as separate and insufficiently connected systems. While the justice system focuses on prosecutions and procedural requirements, survivor support is often provided through social welfare institutions and civil society organisations with limited coordination. As a result, survivors are frequently left to navigate multiple institutions on their own, often without consistent psychological, legal, or social support. A more survivor-centred approach requires integrating support services into every stage of the justice process, from reporting and investigation to testimony and post-trial support. Survivors should have access to trauma-informed legal aid, healthcare, counselling, and social protection regardless of whether they participate in criminal proceedings or of the outcome of a court case. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, stronger cooperation between judicial institutions, healthcare providers, social welfare systems, and civil society organisations is essential. NGOs have long filled institutional gaps by providing psychosocial support and assisting survivors through complex procedures. These experiences show that hybrid models of cooperation can improve survivor protection and strengthen trust in the justice system. Ultimately, justice should not be measured only by convictions, but also by whether survivors feel protected, respected, and supported throughout the process.

Based on the Bosnian experience, what would you urgently recommend to Ukraine — and what mistakes should Ukraine make sure to avoid while the political moment for reform is still open?

Based on the experience of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ukraine should establish a unified and survivor-centered legal framework while political momentum for reform still exists. Delayed and fragmented reforms in BiH created unequal access to rights and support, making later changes far more difficult. Ukraine should avoid fragmented systems operating differently in each administrative unit and ensure that survivors can access healthcare, psychosocial support, reparations, and legal protection without burdensome or retraumatising procedures. Another key lesson is that survivor support must not depend on criminal prosecutions. Justice processes are important, but survivors need immediate and long-term support regardless of court outcomes. Ukraine should also closely involve civil society and survivor organisations in shaping policies from the beginning, as their role is essential in building trust and filling institutional gaps. Most importantly, Ukraine should use the current political window to build a coordinated and sustainable protection system before political fatigue and divisions reduce the space for meaningful reform.

Interview: Katja Giebel.