Females are systematically subjected to horrific sexual violence in armed conflicts. In such cases, international criminal trials must at least treat sexually assaulted victim-witnesses humanely. Thus, this research evaluates whether it is reasonable to summon these victims for an in-person testimony, based on the current mental protections. Where these protections fall short, the study proposes reforms to existing frameworks. Employing a doctrinal methodology alongside qualitative and critical analysis of relevant laws and court practices, this research draws on interdisciplinary insights to present an understanding of the retraumatizing impacts of testifying on conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV).
The International Criminal Court (ICC) and Tribunals such as the ICTY and the ICTR need to change their approach to conflict-related sexual violence, especially against women and children – the most vulnerable and often civilian victims. In-person testimonies can retraumatize victims and risk evidence integrity, particularly when trauma is severe. Videotaping initial victim statements, under a modified Rule 68 of the ICC, offers a victim-centred method that protects reliable testimony while reducing further harm and victim exposure. Given the challenges of safeguarding SGBV victims under the current Statutes, reducing victim exposure is essential. Legal standards, such as the ICTY and ICTR Tribunals´ Rule 96(iii) and ICC´s Rule 70, must be updated to recognize that consent to sexual acts obtained in coercive conflict situations is not genuine. International Criminal Law must evolve accordingly, and financial pressure must be applied on states complicit in sexual violence when justice mechanisms fall short.
Keywords: Evidentiary Provisions, International Criminal Laws, Secondary Victimization, SGBV Victim-Witnesses, Evaluation of Mental Protections, Suggestions for Improvement
Citation: Brink, R. R. (2025). Secondary Victimization and Mass Atrocity Trials – Should Female SGBV Victim-Witnesses Be Summoned to Testify In-Person? J Psychol Neurosci; 7(3):1-10.
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47485/2693-2490.1118