Abstract
The use of bodies as weapons of war in the Donbas conflict is denied by the Ukrainian government and United Nations official reports, contrasting non-governmental organisation (NGO) documents which report the contrary. This article explores the gap between the survivors' testimonies, as captured by NGO research, and the official reports and questions the reasons for low victim reporting and high perpetrator impunity.
By Marine Krauzman
Numerous ceasefire agreements have not appeased the ongoing armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine in the Donbas region. The conflict takes roots in many societal gaps and is fueled by the old tensions between the European Union and Russia. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reported 13,200 deaths [1] since the 6th of April 2014, and over 1,8 million internally displaced or conflict-affected people [2]. The armed conflict violates in many ways international law, which results in the violation of human rights and the degradation of living for the occupied territories and surroundings. Adding to the fact that there is a high concentration of military and paramilitary groups along the contact line, gender-based violence is likely to increase in this region. Furthermore, domestic violence is also exacerbated by armed conflict, as the United Nations noticed [3]. The 2016 investigation of the Justice for Peace in Donbas, an informal union of human rights organisations and initiatives, showed that 75% of the interviewed people had been victims of conflict-related gender-based violence, of which 55% were women [4]. However, this number is widely underreported for many reasons, such as social taboo around sexual violence, and the lack of public services in the conflict region, that possesses low investigation capacities.
The official United Nations’ reports and non-governmental organisations’ (NGOs) investigations contradict each other on the extent of the widespread and systematic use of sexual violence by both sides of the armed forces in conflict, the Ukrainian and the Russian-backed separatists. In 2017, although the OHCHR acknowledged that there is a ‘pattern of sexual violence perpetrated in places of detention’ as means of punishment, torture, or intelligence, the organisation reported that there was no reason to believe that gender-based violence has been used for strategic ends [5]. The international organisation argues that opposite allegations are unverified and are intended to reinforce distrust among local communities.
However, the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war is claimed by many human rights organisations, whose reports and investigations provide hints to contradict the OHCHR. First, women are subjected to ‘survival sex’ in exchange for men supporting their basic needs in the conflict region and have to restrain their own freedom not to put themselves at further risk [6]. Second, sexual violence can become a weapon of war in many other ways, as has occurred in Ukraine. Indeed, the testimonies of detained people who have been victims of sexual violence are numerous and show that rape or the threat of sexual violence is almost systematically employed to erase any form of disobedience [7]. These practices enable both sides to maintain strict and effective control over occupied cities or to restrict freedom of speech, alongside with organised and deliberate kidnapping and sexually abusing dissidents [8]. Sexual violence has also been used to shift the borders of the conflict. Landowners are reported to be threatened with rape if they do not comply with forced, illegal eviction. Finally, gender-based violence is used as a means of propaganda to stimulate hate for the enemy in times of armed conflict, rather than to focus on prevention and investigation of those crimes by the Ukrainian government [9].
Sexual violence is underreported because victims are ashamed or afraid to speak out. This shyness can be explained by the pervasive taboo surrounding sexual violence. On the side of the police forces, there is a strong belief that, most of the time, the victim has a part of the responsibility and that ‘the reconciliation of partners should always be the priority in cases of domestic violence’ [10]. Furthermore, there is little enforcement power given to the investigation infrastructure, which is exacerbated by the armed conflict. On the side of the victim, they often back up thinking that the complaint will not be taken seriously or lead anywhere.
In addition to underreporting by victims, the issue of impunity is equally sizable in Ukraine. Gender-based violence is criminalised under international human rights law and humanitarian law, which technically force Ukraine to align its own legislation. However, there are many flaws in Ukrainian state legislation in this regard. Firstly, Ukraine has still not ratified the Istanbul Convention on the prevention of violence against women, so the state is not bound by any obligation to create a comprehensive legal framework on the matter. Furthermore, Article 438 of the Criminal Code remains the only one referring to sexual violence, encompassing the crime of inhumane treatment [11]. The Criminal Code still relies on the Soviet-era definition of rape, which implies non-anal and heterosexual rape. In doing so, the state fails to address the full spectrum of sexual violence, for example, castration or sexual harassment. Moreover, the lawlessness of the Donbas region and the taboo around the topic make investigations difficult. The Chief Military Prosecutor wrote to the OHCHR claiming that Ukraine was undergoing three criminal proceedings for these charges by the end of 2016, which is an extremely low number compared to the high volume of victims [12].
Conflict-related sexual violence is an issue that affects men and women equally in the Donbas conflict. The official reports of both Ukraine and the United Nations do not seem willing to recognise the scale of this issue, leaving the victims helpless and at risk and the perpetrators unpunished. It is the daily struggle of human rights associations to make the survivors speak up about the unspeakable.
Sources
[1] Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2020) Report on the Human Rights situation in Ukraine: 16 November 2019 to 15 February 2020
[2] United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2017) Ukraine, 15 December 2017.
[3] Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (2013) General recommendation No. 30 on women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situation. UN Doc. CEDAW/C/GC/30. para 34
[4] Eastern-Ukrainian Center for Civic Initiative (2017) Unspoken pain, gender-based violence in the conflict zone of eastern Ukraine. Warsaw
[5] Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2017) Conflict-Related Sexual Violence in Ukraine 14 March 2014 to 31 January 2017
[6] Protection Cluster Ukraine (2016) Protection Considerations for People Living Along the Contact Line
[7] Losh, J. (2017) ‘Rape and the Ukrainian War: How Sexual Violence Fuels Both Sides of the Brutal Conflict’. Newsweek Magazine, 29 November 2017
[8] Bodnar, A. (2016) ‘Gender-based violence as a weapon against the unbowed and a way to entertain’. Justice For Peace in Donbas, 31 August 2016, Retrieved from https://jfp.org.ua/rights/porushennia/violation_categories/henderno-obumovlene-nasylstvo/rights_violations/gbv-as-entertainment?locale=en
[9] Ukrainian Centre for Social Reforms (2016) Analytical report: Gender-Based Violence in The Conflict-Affected Regions of Ukraine. United Nations Population Fund. 20 April 2016 Retrieved from https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/node/124030
[10] Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces and La Strada (2017) Criminal Justice Practice and Violence Against Women. available at www.dcaf.ch/criminal-justice-practice-and-violence-against-women. pp. 44-46
[11] Busol K. (2020) ‘Conflict-related sexual violence in Ukraine: an opportunity for gender-sensitive policymaking?’. Chathamhouse. 18 August 2020
[12] Letter from the Prosecutor General’s Office to OHCHR (2016). 23 December 2016