Harper's Bazaar quotes GJC's 2014 report on rape as a weapon of war in Syria. Comparing Alabama's abortion ban to forced impregnation as a tool to control the female population, this article reverberates GJC's argument that the US's denial of abortion services constitutes torture and cruel treatment.
GJC in the News
Excerpt of Women Under Siege op-ed by GJC Deputy Legal Director Grant Shubin.
On Wednesday, April 23, 2019, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2467 during the Council’s annual Open Debate on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence. .
After months of German-led negotiations, passage of the Resolution ultimately came down to sexual and reproductive health (SRH)—specifically, whether the U.S. would veto its inclusion in the final text.
The U.S. justified its position by claiming that SRH is a euphemism for abortion services. Not only is this not true—SRH includes, among other things, contraception, safe abortion services, HIV prevention, and prenatal healthcare—but even if it were, abortion services for survivors of sexual violence save lives.
Unsafe abortion causes the deaths of 47,000 people each year and leaves another 5 million with some form of permanent or temporary disability. They may suffer complications, including hemorrhage, infection, perforation of the uterus, and damage to the genital tract or internal organs. In fact, the consequences of denying abortion services have been found to be so severe that it can amount to torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment.
The international community cannot become accustomed or complacent to the Trump administration’s use of domestic politics to hold international rights hostage. Because it is more than just words that are given up last minute on the floor of the Security Council—it’s women’s lives.
GJC President Akila Radhakrishnan explains the UN Security Council Resolution 2467 to BBC Newshour Radio. Condemning its lack of direct reference to reproductive health, Akila underscores:
"Sexual and reproductive rights are an essential component of the service provision that women who are raped in war need to receive. When you think about what they go through and experience, to take out an important and essential component of their care is deeply problematic. In previous years, the Security Council has agreed upon language that calls for comprehensive and nondiscriminatory service provisions—including sexual and reproductive rights. What happened with the language is that it became diluted and weak. It had a general reference to medical care and healthcare services."
GJC President Akila Radhakrishnan is quoted by the New Arab on a lack of accountability for the genocidal crimes committed against the Yazidis in 2014.
Excerpt of Ms. Magazine blog post by GJC Communications Manager Liz Olson.
As hundreds of thousands of Rohingya survivors fled to Bangladesh over the past two years, the abuse they suffered in Burma has made headlines.
Their stories are horrific—recounting brutal episodes of torture, murder and sexual violence, often committed in public and in front of family and community members. In different ways, so are their experiences with the press.
Some Rohingya survivors of sexual violence have reportedly been interviewed as many as 70 times each by media outlets, UN bodies and non-governmental organizations—posing serious challenges to the health and safety of survivors and to future justice efforts.
At first glance, the idea that sexual violence can be over-documented may seem counterintuitive. Don’t we want as much evidence as possible to prosecute the perpetrators of these crimes? In practice, however, uncoordinated and overzealous documentation harms both accountability efforts and the well-being of survivors.
The adage that “sex sells” is true in advertising and seems equally true in reporting, even in the coverage of atrocity and human rights abuse. As journalists and advocates cover stories of sexual violence in conflict, we must make sure not to sensationalize or exploit survivors’ suffering in order to make an impact.