Sexual exploitation by UN peacekeepers: the ‘survival sex’ gap in international human rights law

ABSTRACT

Allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse against United Nations peacekeepers over the past decade prompted a zero-tolerance policy response. Despite the many reforms to date, it is the troop-contributing countries which have exclusive criminal jurisdiction over their military contingent members and the current framework has been criticised for failing to ensure accountability of offenders. This article focuses on a particular form of sexual exploitation known as ‘survival sex’; where sex is exchanged for aid or assistance which is already owed to the local population. In an effort to consider ways to improve individual accountability of perpetrators of survival sex, this article will explore three arguments; first, that survival sex should be considered violence against women under international human rights law and, second, that state obligations to respond to survival sex do not currently exist. Third, the question of whether the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women should consider filling the ‘survival sex’ gap will be discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Violence against women
• United Nations peacekeeping
• sexual exploitation and abuse
• Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Note on contributor

Dr Cassandra Mudgway is Lecturer in law, teaching Legal Reasoning and Writing, Constitutional Law, and International Criminal Law.

Notes

1 Culminating in the United Nations Secretary-General Bulletin, Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, 9 October 2003, ST/SGB/2003/13.

2 Infra n. 28 and accompanying text.

3 See for example R. Freedman, ‘How Can We Hold the UN Accountable for Sexual Violence?’, OUPblog, Oxford University Press, 7 February 2016, http://blog.oup.com/2016/02/un-accountable-sexual-violence (accessed 11 June 2016); V. Kent, ‘Peacekeepers as Perpetrators of Abuse’, African Security Review 14 (2005): 85; C. Morris, ‘Peacekeeping and the Sexual Exploitation of Women and Girls in Post-Conflict Societies: A Serious Enigma’, Journal of International Peacekeeping (2010): 184; M. Odello, ‘Tackling Criminal Acts in Peacekeeping Operations: The Accountability of Peacekeepers’, Journal of Conflict & Security Law 15 (2010): 347; T. Awori, C. Lutz, and P.J. Thapa, Final Report: Expert Mission to Evaluate Risks to SEA Prevention Efforts in MINUSTAH, UNMIL, MONUSCO, and UNMISS, 3 November 2013, http://www.aidsfreeworld.org/Newsroom/Press-Releases/2015/~/media/Files/Peacekeeping/2013%20Expert%20Team%20Report%20FINAL.pdf (accessed 10 December 2015); Office of Internal Oversight Services, Evaluation Report: Evaluation of the Enforcement and Remedial Assistance Efforts for Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by the United Nations and Related Personnel in Peacekeeping Operations, 15 May 2015 (Evaluation Report); Owen Bowcott, ‘UN Accused of “Gross Failure” Over Alleged Sexual Abuse by French Troops’, 17 December 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/17/un-gross-failure-sexual-abuse-french-troops-central-african-republic (accessed 20 December 2015); ‘UN Sex Abuse Scandal: Rise in Allegations against Peacekeepers’, 4 March 2016, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-35724978 (accessed 10 March 2016).

4 M. Deschamps, H.B. Jallow, and Y. Sooka, Taking Action on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by Peacekeepers: Report of an Independent Review on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by International Peacekeeping Forces in the Central African Republic, 17 December 2015, http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/centafricrepub/Independent-Review-Report.pdf (accessed 6 July 2016), at x.

5 Ibid.

6 But see J. McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies: Re-reading the Zero Tolerance Approach to Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse in United Nations Peace Support Operations’, Journal of International Peacekeeping 18 (2014): 1.

7 See for example Investigation into Sexual Exploitation of Refugees by Aid Workers in West Africa, 11 October 2002, A/57/465; Human Rights Watch, The Power These Men Have Over Us: Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by African Union Forces in Somali, September 2014, http://www.hrw.org/report/2014/09/08/power-these-men-have-over-us/sexual-exploitation-and-abuse-african-union-forces (accessed January 2015); M. Pflanz, ‘Six-year-olds Sexually Abused by UN Peacekeepers’, 26 May 2008, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/2032996/Six-year-olds-sexually-abused-by-UN-peacekeepers.html (accessed January 2016); UNHCR and Save The Children-UK, Sexual Violence and Exploitation: The Experience of Refugee Children in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, February 2002, http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/resources/online-library/sexual-violence-exploitation-the-experience-of-refugee-children-in-guinea-liberia-and-sierra-leone (accessed January 2016).

8 Amnesty International, ‘CAR: UN Troops Implicated in Rape of Girl and Indiscriminate Killings Must Be Investigated’, News Release, 11 August 2015, http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/08/car-un-troops-implicated-in-rape-of-girl-and-indiscriminate-killings-must-be-investigated (accessed 15 August 2015).

9 See for example ‘Two New Cases of Alleged Sex Abuse by UN Peacekeepers in C. Africa’, 2 July 2016, http://www.yahoo.com/news/two-cases-alleged-sex-abuse-peacekeepers-c-africa-171130393.html (accessed 6 July 2016).

10 Odello, ‘Tackling Criminal Acts in Peacekeeping Operations’, 350.

11 See Secretary-General, A Comprehensive Strategy to Eliminate Future Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations, 24 March 2005, A/59/710, prepared by Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al-Hussein (Zeid Report).

12 Ibid., para. 8.

13 UN Conduct and Discipline Unit, Ten Rules: Code of Personal Conduct for Blue Helmets, http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/documents/ten_in.pdf (accessed 6 July 2016); UN Conduct and Discipline Unit, We Are United Nations Peacekeeping Personnel, http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/documents/un_in.pdf (accessed 6 July 2016).

14 UN S-G Bulletin, Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse.

15 Ibid., para. 3.3(b)-(c).

16 Ibid., at para. 3.3(d).

17 See generally UN S-G Bulletin, Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse.

18 Model Status of Forces Agreement between the United Nations and Host Countries, 9 October 1990, GA A/45/594, (SOFA) at para. 47(a)-(b).

19 Manual on Policies and Procedures Concerning the Reimbursement and Control of Contingent-Owned Equipment of Troop/Police Contributors Participating in Peacekeeping Missions (COE Manual), 27 October 2011, A/c.5/66/8, ch. 9 ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ (2007 MOU).

20 F. Rawski, ‘To Waive or Not to Waive: Immunity and Accountability in UN Peacekeeping Operations’, Connecticut Journal of International Law 18 (2002–2003): 103 at 104.

21 Ibid., at 106.

22 2007 MOU, at article 7 quinquiens.

23 These include, UN volunteers, individual contractors, civilian police, military observers, and military contingents see Odello, ‘Tackling Criminal Acts in Peacekeeping Operations’, 365.

24 Sections 20 and 23 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations 1949, 1 UNTS 15.

25 Report of the Group of Legal Experts on Ensuring the Accountability of United Nations Staff and Experts on Mission with Respect to Criminal Acts Committed in Peacekeeping Operations, 16 August 2006, A/60/980 at para. 22.

26 See for example Awori, Lutz, and Thapa, Final Report, 3–4; Morland, ‘Liberté, égalité, impunité: French Peacekeepers Unlikely to Face Prosecution for Alleged Child Sex Abuse’, 4 July 2016, http://www.irinnews.org/analysis/2016/07/04/libert%C3%A9-%C3%A9galit%C3%A9-impunit%C3%A9 (accessed 6 July 2016).

27 These include reforms that seek to regulate the behaviour of troops; for example, the instalment of recreation facilities within the mission site, out-of-bounds areas and curfews, and gender mainstreaming: see Z. Deen-Racsmary, ‘The Amended UN Model Memorandum of Understanding: A New Incentive for States to Discipline and Prosecute Military Members of National Peacekeeping Contingents?’ Journal of Conflict and Security Law 16 (2011): 321 at 333; Zeid Report, paras 39–43. Other reforms have focussed on improved education and training, for example Conduct and Discipline Teams are set up in the field to raise local awareness of sexual exploitation and abuse and reporting mechanisms; see Odello, ‘Tackling Criminal Acts in Peacekeeping Operations’, 355.

28 See Evaluation Report, paras 47 and 55.

29 See for example Amnesty International, ‘CAR’; and Yahoo News, ‘Two New Cases of Alleged Sex Abuse by UN Peacekeepers in C. Africa’.

30 See Evaluation Report; Awori, Lutz, and Thapa, Final Report; Report of the Secretary General, The Future of United Nations Peace Operations: Implementation of Recommendations of the High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations, 2 September 2015, A/70/357-S/2015/682 at paras 119–126; secretary-general Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, 13 February 2015, A/69/779.

31 Awori, Lutz, and Thapa, Final Report, at 3.

32 ‘Panel to Review UN Reponses to Alleged Central African Republic Sex Abuse’, The Guardian, 22 June 2015.

33 Deschamps, Jallow, and Sooka, Taking Action on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by Peacekeepers.

34 Ibid., xi; Secretary-General Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, 16 February 2016, A/70/729 at paras 52–54.

35 S-G Bulletin, Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, at 1.

36 Ibid., sexual abuse is defined as: ‘the actual or threatened physical intrusion of a sexual nature, whether by force or under unequal or coercive conditions’.

37 Ibid., sexual exploitation is defined as: ‘actual or attempted abuse of a position of vulnerability, deferential power or trust for sexual purposes including, but not limited to, profiting from monetarily, socially, or politically from the sexual exploitation of another’.

38 Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the Investigation into Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by aid workers in West Africa, 11 October 2002, A/57/465 at 1 and Annex I ‘Report of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Task Force on Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in Humanitarian Crises’, at para. 8.

39 See generally D. Otto, ‘Making Sense of Zero-Tolerance Policies in Peacekeeping Sexual Economies’, in Sexuality and the Law: Feminist Engagements, ed. Muno and Stuchin (New York: Routledge-Cavendish, 2007); Simic, Regulation of Sexual Conduct in UN Peacekeeping Operations (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2012).

40 See for example, C. Harrington, Politicisation of Sexual Violence: From Abolitionism to Peacekeeping (Surrey: Ashgate, 2010); K.M. Jennings, ‘Service, Sex, and Security: Gendered Peacekeeping Economies in Liberia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo’, Security Dialogue 45 (2014): 313; K.M. Jennings and V. Nikolic-Ristanovic, ‘UN Peacekeeping Economies and Local Sex Industries: Connections and Implications’, MICROCON Research Working Paper 17, September 2009; A.R. Kolbe, ‘“It’s Not a Gift When it Comes with Price”: A Qualitative Study of Transactional Sex between UN Peacekeepers and Haitian Citizens’, Stability: International Journal of Security & Development 4 (2015): 1; Otto, ‘Making Sense of Zero-Tolerance Policies in Peacekeeping Sexual Economies’; McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies’; Simic, Regulation of Sexual Conduct in UN Peacekeeping Operations.

41 Kolbe, ‘“It’s Not a Gift When it Comes with Price”’, at 20; Otto, ‘Making Sense of Zero-Tolerance Policies in Peacekeeping Sexual Economies’, at 260–66.

42 P. Patel and P. Tripodi, ‘Peacekeepers, HIV and the Role of Masculinity in Military Behaviour’, International Peacekeeping 14 (2007): 584 at 588; McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies’, at 6.

43 See P. Higate, ‘Peacekeepers, Masculinities, and Sexual Exploitation’, Men and Masculinities 10 (2007): 99; S. Martin, ‘Must Boys be Boys?: Ending Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in UN Peacekeeping Missions, Refugees International’, October 2005, at 5.

44 See Otto, ‘Making Sense of Zero-Tolerance Policies in Peacekeeping Sexual Economies’; McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies’; see also Harrington, Politicisation of Sexual Violence; Jennings, ‘Service, Sex, and Security’.

45 Awori, Lutz, and Thapa, Final Report, at 6.

46 OIOS, Evaluation Report, [47].

47 See for example, Kolbe, ‘“It’s Not a Gift When it Comes with Price”’; B. Beber, M.J. Gilligan, J. Guardadoi, and S. Karim, ‘Peacekeeping, Compliance with International Norms, and Transactional Sex in Monrovia, Liberia’, International Organization 71 (2017): 1; J.K. Adjei and E.M. Saewyc, ‘Boys are Exempt: Sexual Exploitation of Adolescents in Sub-Saharan Africa’, Child Abuse & Neglect 65 (2017): 14.

48 See for example, Jennings, ‘Service, Sex, and Security’.

49 Otto, ‘Making Sense of Zero-Tolerance Policies in Peacekeeping Sexual Economies’; Simic, Regulation of Sexual Conduct in UN Peacekeeping Operations, at 111 and 113.

50 K.M. Jennings, ‘Unintended Consequences of Intimacy: Political Economies of Peacekeeping and Sex Tourism’, International Peacekeeping 17 (2010): 229 at 234; Kolbe, ‘“It’s Not a Gift When it Comes with Price”’, at 11.

51 Spencer, ‘Making Peace’, at 171.

52 See for example, Human Rights Watch, The Power These Men Have Over Us, at 22.

53 See for example, The Investigation by the Office of Internal Oversight Services into Allegations of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the United Nations Organisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, at para. 18.

54 Report of the Secretary-General on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence, 13 January 2012, A/66/657-S/2012/33 at para. 3.

55 Secretary-General, ‘Secretary-General Appoints Independent Review Panel on UN Responses to Allegations of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by Foreign Military Forces in Central African Republic’, Press Release, 22 June 2015.

56 N. Quenivet, ‘The Dissonance between the United Nations Zero Tolerance Policy and the Criminalisation of Sexual Offences on the International Level’, International Criminal Law Review 7 (2007): 657 at 671.

57 For example, article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 1998, 2187 UNTS 3.

58 N. Quenivet, ‘The Role of the International Criminal Court in the Prosecution on Peacekeepers for Sexual Offences’, in Law Enforcement within the Framework of Peace Support Operations, ed. Arnold (Leiden: Konihklijke Brill NV, 2008) at 671.

59 Rome Statute, article 7.

60 R. Burke, ‘UN Military Peacekeeper Complicity in Sexual Abuse: The ICC or a Tri-Hybrid Court’, Thematic Prosecution of International Sex Crimes, ed. Bergsmo (Beijing: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher, 2012), at 331. Although the scope of this article is confined to international human rights law, there is literature around the issue of serious forms of sexual exploitation and abuse committed by peacekeepers argued as international crimes, see M. O’Brien, ‘Protectors on Trial? Prosecuting Peacekeepers for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in the International Criminal Court’, International Journal of Law Crime and Justice 40 (2012): 223.

61 For example, SC Res 1820, 19 June 2008, S/RES/1820 (2008); SC Res 1888, 30 September 2009, S/RES/1888 (2009); SC Res 1889, 5 October 2009, S/RES/1889 (2009); SC Res 2106, 24 June 2013, S/RES/2106 (2013).

62 See 2007 MOU, article 7 quater.

63 Ibid., article 7 quinquiens.

64 GA Res 61/29, 18 December 2006, A/RES/61/29; GA Res 62/63, 8 January 2008, A/RES/62/63; GA Res 63/119, 15 January 2009, A/RES/63/119; GA Res 64/110, 15 January 2010, A/RES/64/110; GA Res 65/20, 10 January 2011, A/RES/65/20; GA Res 66/93, 13 January 2012, A/RES/66/93; GA Res 67/88, 14 January 2013, A/RES/67/88; GA Res 68/105, 18 December 2013, A/RES/68/105; GA Res 69/114, 18 December 2014, A/RES/69/114; GA Res 70/144, 18 December 2015, A/RES/70/144.

65 Report of the Group of Legal Experts, Annex III.

66 Ibid., at para. 68.

67 Ibid., Annex II at draft article 3(2)(c)-(d) which cover rape, sexual violence and sexual activity with children.

68 SC Res 2272, 11 March 2016, S/RES/2272.

69 Report of the Secretary-General, Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse: A New Approach, 28 February 2017, A/71/818.

70 Ibid., at paras 58. The compact itself is of a voluntary nature so would only apply to those member states which sign up to it.

71 Ibid., at para. 59(xxii).

72 Ibid., at para. 59(ix).

73 Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1996, 226 at para. 25; Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 2004, 178 at para. 106.

74 The question of whether and when international humanitarian law applies to UN peacekeepers has been discussed elsewhere, see for example, R. Murphy, ‘United Nations Military Operations and International Humanitarian Law: What Rules to Apply to Peacekeepers?’ Criminal Law Forum 14 (2003): 153; J. Saura, ‘Lawful Peacekeeping: Applicability of International Humanitarian Law to United Nations Peacekeeping Operations’, Hastings Law Journal 58 (2006–2007): 479; D. Shraga, ‘UN Peacekeeping Operations: Applicability of International Humanitarian Law and Responsibility for Operations-Related Damage’, The American Journal of International Law 94 (2000): 406; see also United Nations Secretary-General’s Bulletin Observance by UN Forces of International Humanitarian Law, 6 August 1999, ST/SGB/1999/13.

75 P. Alston and R. Goodman, International Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), at 58–9.

76 Burke, ‘UN Military Peacekeeper Complicity in Sexual Abuse’, at 331.

77 This article focuses on women as they are over-represented as victims of survival sex, however it should be noted that men can be and have been victims of survival sex. It is acknowledged that men as a class of victims of conflict-related sexual violence have been neglected in policy and academic discourse, and this article risks further alienation of that subset of victims. The intention of this article is to shed light on an aspect of sexual exploitation which has been largely ignored and by focusing on violence against women it is not the intention of the article to exclude other areas of international human rights law which may address survival sex and therefore include discussion of male victims. There is growing literature on men as a class of victims of conflict-related sexual violence, for example, see D.A. Lewis, ‘Unrecognized Victims: Sexual Violence against Men in Conflict Settings under International Law’, Wisconsin International Law Journal (2009): 1; S. Mouthaan, ‘Sexual Violence against Men and International Law – Criminalising the Unmentionable’, International Criminal Law Revie 13 (2013): 665; S. Sivakumaran, ‘Male/Male Rape and the “Taint” of Homosexuality’, Human Rights Quarterly 27 (2005): 1274; L. Stemple, ‘Male Rape and Human Rights’, Hastings Law Journal 60 (2009): 605.

78 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Fourth World Conference on Women, 1995 (Platform for Action) at para. 118.

79 Report of the Secretary-General, In-Depth Study on all Forms of Violence against Women, 6 July 2006, A/61/122/Add.1 at paras 65–92.

80 H. Charlesworth and C. Chinkin The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000), at 235.

81 Platform for Action, at para. 113.

82 GA Res 61/143, 19 December 2006, A/RES/61/143 at para. 3.

83 GA Res 48/104, 20 December 1993, A/RES/48/104 (DEVAW) article 1.

84 Ibid., article 1.

85 In-Depth Study on all Forms of Violence against Women.

86 Ibid., See also Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation 19: Violence against Women (1992) at para. 11.

87 C. Morris, ‘Peacekeeping and the Sexual Exploitation of Women and Girls in Post-Conflict Societies: A Serious Enigma to Establishing the Rule of Law’, Journal of International Peacekeeping 14 (2010): 184 at 191.

88 D. Otto, ‘Violence against Women: Something Other than a Human Rights Violation?’ Australian Feminist Law Journal 1 (1993): 159 at 161.

89 Zeid Report, at para. 6.

90 V. Vojdik, ‘Sexual Abuse and Exploitation of Women and Girls by UN Peacekeeping Troops’, Michigan State Journal of International Law 15 (2007): 157 at 161; see also Awori, Lutz, and Thapa, Final Report, at 6; Martin, ‘Must Boys be Boys?’, at 3, talking about pre-existing sexual violence in West African states and Haiti; Dubravka Simonovic, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, 19 April 2016, A/HRC/32/42 at para. 37.

91 Vodjik, ‘Sexual Abuse and Exploitation of Women and Girls by UN Peacekeeping Troops’, at 161; Martin, ‘Must Boys be Boys?’, at 3; Simonovic, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, at para. 61.

92 Beijing Platform for Action, at para. 116.

93 S.W. Spencer, ‘Making Peace: Preventing and Responding to Sexual Exploitation by UN Peacekeepers’, Journal of Public International Affairs 16 (2005): 167 at 171; McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies’, at 6; see also Awori, Lutz, and Thapa, Final Report, at 6.

94 R. Nordas and S.C.A. Rustad, ‘Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by Peacekeepers: Understanding Variation’, International Interactions 39 (2013): 511.

95 See generally McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies’; Jennings and Nikolic-Ristanovic, ‘UN Peacekeeping Economies and Local Sex Industries’; K.M. Jennings, ‘Unintended Consequences of Intimacy: Political Economies of Peacekeeping and Sex Tourism’, International Peacekeeping 17 (2010): 229.

96 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under Article 18 of the Convention on the Combined Eighth and Ninth Periodic Reports of Haiti, 3 December 2014, CEDAW/C/HTI/8-9 at para. 77.

97 Ibid., at paras 78–9.

98 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations on the Combined Eighth and Ninth Periodic Reports of Haiti, 4 March 2016, CEDAW/C/HTI/CO/8-9 at para. 23.

99 S-G Bulletin, Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, at 3.2(d).

100 Zeid Report, at para. 6.

101 Ibid.

102 ‘Report of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Task Force on Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in Humanitarian Crises’, at para. 2.

103 In-Depth Study of all Forms of Violence against Women, at 361.

104 And these all may be quite different to the ethnicity, language, culture and religion of the host state population see O’Brien National and International Criminal Jurisdiction over United Nations Peacekeeping Personnel for Gender-Based Crimes against Women (PhD Thesis, University of Nottingham, 2010), at 32.

105 Duncanson, ‘Forces for Good? Narratives of Military Masculinity in Peacekeeping Operations’, International Feminist Journal of Politics 11 (2009): 63 at 65.

106 Patel and Tripodi, ‘Peacekeepers, HIV and the Role of Masculinity in Military Behaviour’, at 589; A. Kronsell, Gender, Sex, and the Postnational Defense: Militarism and Peacekeeping (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), at 95–9; A. Kronsell, ‘Sexed Bodies and Military Masculinities: Gender Path Dependence in EU’s Common Security and Defense Policy’, Men and Masculinities (2015): 1 at 11; McGill, ‘Survival Sex in Peacekeeping Economies’. See also, S. Karim and K. Beardsley, ‘Explaining Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in Peacekeeping Missions: The Role of Female Peacekeepers and Gender Equality in Contributing Countries’, Journal of Peace Research 53 (2016): 100. The performance of harmful masculinities can also underlie sexual violence against men when connected to male aggression and hyper heterosexuality, see generally S. Sivakumaran, ‘Sexual Violence against Men in Armed Conflict’, The European Journal of International Law 8 (2007): 253.

107 For example, in January male military contingent members made up of total of 94% of troops contributed. Current statistics on gender diversity in peacekeeping can be found online: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/resources/statistics/gender.shtml (accessed 6 July 2016) (however, the official stats only portray numbers for males and females, other genders are not represented).

108 DEVAW, article 4(c).

109 Ibid., article 4(d).

110 Platform for Action, at para. 124(b)-(c).

111 See at GA Res, 16 November 2000, A/RES/S-23/3 at para. 66(c)-(d).

112 CEDAW, General Recommendation 19.

113 Convention on All Forms of Elimination of Discrimination against Women 1979, 1249 UNTS (CEDAW).

114 See for example, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Concluding Observations on the Third Periodic Report of Azerbaijan, adopted by the Committee at its fiftieth session, 5 June 2013, E/C.12/AZE/CO/3 at para. 18; Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Third Report of Ecuador as approved by the Committee at its forty-ninth session, 13 December 2012, E/C.12/ECU/CO/3 at para. 21.

115 See for example, Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Cape Verde, 23 April 2012, CCPR/C/CPV/CO/1 at para. 9; Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Dominican Republic, 19 April 2012, CCPR/C/DOM/CO/5 at para. 11.

116 For example see, Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations on the Fifth Periodic Review of Peru, 29 April 2013, CCPR/C/PER/CO/5 at para. 10; Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, Concluding Observations on the Initial to Third Reports of the United Republic of Tanzania adopted by the Committee at its forty-ninth session, 13 December 2012, E/C.12/TZA/CO/1-3 at para. 13.

117 CEDAW, General Recommendation 19, at para. 6.

118 CDEAW, article 2(b) see also article 2(e).

119 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women General Recommendation No. 28: on the Core Obligations of States Parties under Article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 19 December 2010, CEDAW/C/2010/47/GC.2 at para. 19.

120 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Angela González Carreňo v. Spain (47/2012), CEDAW/C/58/D/47/2012 at para. 9.7 and 11(b)(ii); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Banu Akbak, Gülen Khan and Melissa Őzdemir v. Austria (6/2005), CEDAW/C/39/D/6/2005 at para. 12.1.2 and 12.3(a); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Hakan Goekce, Handan Goekce and Guelue Goekce v. Austria (5/2005), CEDAW/C/39/D/5/2005 at para. 12.3(a); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, S V P v. Bulgaria (31/2011), CEDAW/C/53/D/31/2011 at para. 9.3; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, V K v. Bulgaria (20/2008), CEDAW/C/49/D/20/2008 at para. 9.3; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations on the Combined Initial and Second Periodic Reports of Afghanistan, 10 July 2013, CEDAW/C/AFG/CO/1-2 at para. 23(a); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Israel, 4 February 2011, CEDAW/C/ISR/CO/5 at para. 23(a); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: South Africa, 5 April 2011, CEDAW/C/ZAF/CO/4 at para. 31(c).

121 See for example, Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Côte d’Ivoire, 21 October 2011, CEDAW/C/CIV/CO/1-3 at para. 30; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Kuwait, 8 November 2011, CEDAW/C/KWT/CO/3-4 at para. 31(b).

122 See Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women 1994 article 7(b): ‘The States Parties condemn all forms of violence against women and agree to pursue, by all appropriate means and without delay, policies to prevent, punish and eradicate such violence and undertake to:  … apply due diligence to prevent, investigate and impose penalties for violence against women’. See also article7(c).

123 See Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women 2003 article 4(b) which requires state parties to ‘adopt such other legislative, administrative, social and economic measures as may be necessary to ensure the prevention, punishment and eradication of all forms of violence against women’. See also African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, Social and Economic Rights Action (SERAC) and Another v. Nigeria (115/96), 2001.

124 See Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence 2011, CETS No: 210 article (1)(a); see also article 5 with reference to due diligence and article 49(2) general obligations. See also articles 36, 37, 38, 39 and 40.

125 See for example, Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: South Africa, at para. 25.

126 Concluding Observations of the Committee of the Elimination of Discretion against Women: Côte d’Ivoire, at para. 29(b).

127 Ibid.

128 See ‘Sexual Abuse Cases Tarnish Image of Africa UN Peacekeepers’, The Journal of Turkish Weekly, 15 August 2015, http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/08/17/news/sexual-abuse-cases-tarnish-image-of-africa-un-peacekeepers (accessed 20 September 2015); ‘Timeline of UN Peacekeeper Sexual Abuse Cases’, Child Rights International Network, 2015, http://www.crin.org/en/home/campaigns/transparency/timeline-un-peacekeeper-sexual-abuse-cases (accessed 22 June 2016); Buchanan, ‘UN Peacekeeping: Allegations of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse – A 20 Year History of Shame’, International Business Times, 7 March 2016, http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/un-peacekeeping-allegations-sexual-exploitation-abuse-20-year-history-shame-1547581 (accessed 22 June 2016).

129 Concluding Observations on the Combined Eighth and Ninth Periodic Reports of Haiti, at para. 23.

130 Ibid., at paras 23–24(e).

131 Velaswuez Rodriguez v. Honduras IACtHR Series C 42 (1989) at para. 172.

132 Case 12.626, Lenahan (Gonzales) v. United States of American Report No 80/11 (2011); see for discussion A.J. Sennett, ‘Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States of America: Defining Due Diligence?’ Harvard International Law Journal 53 (2012): 538; Case 12.051, da Penha Maia Fernandes v. Brazil Report No 54/01 (2001); see for discussion R.M. Celorio, ‘The Rights of Women in the Inter-American System of Human Rights: Current Opportunities and Challenges in Standards-Setting’, University of Miami Law Review 65 (2001): 819.

133 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, 1 August 2011, A/66/215 at para. 50.

134 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences: Integration of the Human Rights of Women and the Gender Perspective: Violence against Women: The Due Diligence Standard as a Tool for the Elimination of Violence against Women, 20 January 2006, E/CN.4/2006/61 at para. 14; Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, 10 June 2015, A/HRC/29/27 at para. 63.

135 Sennett, ‘Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States of America’, at 547; see also Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences (2015), at para. 63.

136 Manjoo has also proposed a specific monitoring body to oversee the implementation of state obligations in relation to violence against women, see Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences (2015), at para. 63; UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘UN Expert Urges States to Agree to Specific Legal Obligations to Fight Violence against Women and Girls’, media release, 22 June 2015.

137 Hakan Goekce, Handan Goekce and Guelue Goekce v. Austria, at para. 12.1.2; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, R P B v. The Philippines (34/2011), CEDAW/C/57/D/34/2011 at para. 8.3; See also Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Côte d’Ivoire, at para. 31(c)-(d); Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Kuwait, at para. 31(b); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding Observations of the Committee of Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Bangladesh, 4 February 2011, CEDAW/C/BGD/CO/7 at para. 20(b).

138 See ibid.

139 Case of Gonzales et al (‘Cotton Field’) v. Mexico IACtHR Series C 205 (2009) at 258; see discussion in V. Waiseman, ‘Human Trafficking: State Obligations to Protect Victims’ Rights, the Current Framework and a New Due Diligence Standard’, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review (2010): 385 at 411–12.

140 Waiseman, ‘Human Trafficking’, at 419.

141 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, 14 May 2013, A/HRC/23/49 at para. 72; Sennett, ‘Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States of America’, at 543.

142 Article 2(1) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966, 999 UNTS 171; article 2(1) Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, 1577 UNTS 3; article 10 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984, 1465 UNTS 8 (CAT).

143 For example, CAT, article 5(b); Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, article 44(b).

144 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences (2013) supra n 141, at para 12.

145 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women General Recommendation 28: on the Core Obligations under Article 2 of the Convention, 16 December 2010, CEDAW/C/GC/28 at para. 12; see also General Recommendation 30 on Women in Conflict Prevention, Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations, 18 October 2013, CEDAW/C/GC/30.

146 Concluding Observations of the Committee of the Elimination of Discretion against Women: Côte d’Ivoire.

147 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences (2011), at para. 17; In-Depth Study on all Forms of Violence against Women, at 86.

148 General Recommendation 19.

149 Ibid., at para. 16.

150 General Recommendation 30.

151 It is acknowledged that by solely framing survival sex as violence against women and within the framework of the CEDAW Committee, male victims of survival sex may be left without protection. The CEDAW Committee has limited the use and definition of ‘gender-based’ violence to violence against women specifically, and so excludes male victims, see Stemple, ‘Male Rape and Human Rights’, at 619–20. However, within the rhetoric of ‘violence against women’, particularly by the special rapporteurs, such violence is constructed as forming part of gendered performance. See for example above n. 106, and related discussion on the performance of harmful masculinities. Such performance of masculinity can be directed towards men as well as women. Therefore, it is arguable that when the CEDAW Committee addresses state obligations to respond to survival sex committed by peacekeepers the committee could also include the possibility of male victims. However, this particular discussion is beyond the scope of the current article.